The Best Reason to Ignore ‘Climategate’: The Climate Really Is Changing

Ignore the fact that top scientists are stretching the truth to push bogus “science” so that they can get billions of dollars of government money? Great idea!!

Yes the earth is in a warming phase… but to say that we are on a spiral to certain death based on figures that cannot be proven is idiotic.

The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance — it is the illusion of knowledge. –Daniel Boorstin

So you're saying that the reason why these emails, explicity stating that evidence was doctored, should be ignored, is because there's new evidence from the same organizations claiming the world is going to be destroyed? That seems kind of idiotic to me. Grasp at straws some more.

What finalized my transition into becoming a skeptic was the realization that every pro-AGW argument rested on computer models, and if one researches the reliability of those models, even before we got deep into this cooling phase, one realized that the models were wildly inaccurate – to the point that they cannot and have never have been able to back-cast accurately. In order to prove AGW beyond reasonable doubt, the models have to work. They don't and they never have – which is why CRU needed to hide information, manipulate data, squeeze skeptics out of the peer review process (which they control), “lose” files rather than submit to FOI requests, and other examples of Enron-style intellectual ability. And this is all the while screaming “CONSENSUS” and telling us the time for debate is over.

Show me an accurate computer model, and I'll be a believer. Sounds reasonable, no?

But before the storm breaks, I think we should summarise what's important in the emails.

First, prominent climate scientists, including a lead author of IPCC report sections, were willing to discuss withholding or deleting information to frustrate legitimate requests made under the Freedom of Information Act in the UK. They apparently chose who could not receive information based on the requester's identity, which may have been unlawful. They threatened to delete data–data which in fact has since disappeared. They advised each other to delete emails.

Second, these same scientists worked closely together to control channels of communication regarding climate science and global warming. They banded together to minimise or eliminate skeptical discussion. While telling the world that only peer-reviewed science should be considered legitimate, they fiercely fought to prevent skeptic writings from being peer-reviewed at all. They wrote openly about replacing an uncooperative journal editor (who was later replaced), and boycotting journals that published skeptical papers. They organised peer review so that they reviewed each others' papers.

Third, they were willing to change data so that their presentations of the state of climate looked worse. At the end of the day, this is most damning–most of the rest, even apparently illegal FOI actions, is just politics and a playground media strategy. But while world governments were imposing taxes, changing energy policies, preparing energy-based conflict policies, planning to deal with warming-based immigration, these people were content to display figures that were wrongly exaggerated to show the warming they had previously predicted but could not find in actual measurements.

I see that Al Gore has made another glass of kool-aid for you. Man made global warming is as real as your argument to discredit the cover-up to hide the facts. Good luck with your uphill battle to cover the truth that has finally been set free

Mr. Wiener, give up — it's over!

Case in point: a study released today by 26 leading climatologists, which finds that the climate situation is actually far more dire than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had led us to believe.

*Eyeroll*

Keep ratcheting up the hyperbole, Aaron. I promise we take you seriously.

You have got to be kidding Mr Wiener. You can try to whitewash this all you want to protect your fanatical belief system in AGW but the facts are that the leaked emails and computer source code are riddled with clear examples and evidence of these “scientists” (whom are at the heart of the IPCC's research) cooking the data, conspiring to cook the data, conspiring to defame and discredit other scientists, conspiring to hijack the peer review process and even discussing climate change propaganda.

You can deny it all you want but it only shows you to be an incredibly dishonest journalist with an agenda.

The theory of AGW is dead. These criminal scientists will lose their tenure and their prestigious positions. If they don't go to jail they will find themselves teaching climate science at their local community college as discredited frauds.

Now lets begin discussing some real environmental issues, shall we?

2 + 2 = 5! 2 + 2 = 5! Believe me! Honest! It's not a scam! – Aaron Wiener

[...] Post By Google News Click Here For The Entire Article Build Solar Power System-DIY Solar Panel [...]

Who knew so many shills for the energy industry read your blog? Awesome.

I don't suppose any of these leaked emails by these politically neutral scientists provide an explanation for all the excessive global warming, excessive global cooling, and all the other climate change that created the ice ages and made Greenland warm enough to be called GREENLAND! Man-made global warming is an idiotic, corrupt idea designed to do one thing: justify socialistic tax increases and crap politics in the name of saving the planet. There was climate change long before coal fired power plants and ignorant leftists complaining about excessive farting by cows.

I see Mr. Wiener applies the same principles of ethics to his journalism as does the IPCC on its research. Unfortunately the new “summary” is released by the same people who provided false data on the first go-round. Many more “leading climatologists” are questioning not only the raw data but the premise itself. But… the new psuedo-religion of “climate change”, proped up largly by a complcit press (Wiener) won't allow honest debate on the subject.

North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) has published a report (not motivated by politics) that examined in detail the fact that polar ice is no longer shrinking. The crux of the article was about shipping lanes that companies hoped would be open, but aren't because the ice has been increasing since 2007. So the evil corporations were hoping for better shipping routes, and it's not happening.

No one at NORAD gets grant money if there is global warming. They are concerned by national security and President Obama is their boss. Global warming is natural and is all about the sun and the angle/orbit the of earth. Even NASA has published a report that shows a somewhat mirrored warming (and cooling) trend on Mars. No cows farting on Mars last time I checked.

[...] in Daily life, Environment, Global warming, Science at 1:03 pm by LeisureGuy Very good article by Aaron Weiner in the Washington Independent. From the article: … A study released today by [...]

This was no smash and grab.. It was a full on burn.. A inside job.. The emails are crystal clear fraud.. and the data (the other 100 mb) is being poured over as we speak.. This data has been held back for some reason.. The freedom of information act has been ignored.. Then they said they lost the data.. This is just the opening juicy email shot.. The knock out punch is coming soon.. I can hear the delete button and paper shredders.. People will turn to save their own rear ends.. Its over.. and you know it..

So much effort and such a tight ship taken down by a low level worker not getting the big bucks or treated in a respectful manner.. 20 grand to dump the server on a disk.. and roast those SOBs all the way to hell..

Dont tell me that some hacker broke in.. They had the very best protecting their secrets.. This mole did his work after hours and it was a piece of cake.. thats what they get for being dirty.. Trust me the people responsible are in charge and enjoying every second of their suffering.. The other boot will drop and all the worlds leaders know its coming.. David and Goliath indeed. One little rock can shatter the illusion..

It's not working Aaron. “the emails just weren’t that incriminating”…who's in denial now?

Those emails are incredible and damning. Some of them made me laugh out loud. Wow. The hubris – the working toward a predetermined conclusion. It's sad to see you stay the course with these frauds. You had a chance to jump ship and blame them for defrauding you, but the hubris got to you too I guess. You think you're immune?

Ratcheting up the rhetoric? It's pathetic. Most of those facts are a lie or exaggeration and the emails show that. They've been fudging the facts and cooking the books.

What's the real game Aaron, are you an ideologue?

Given the screwed-unto-death character of the methodology upon which the “global warming” fraud had been predicated, how the hell could the “26 leading climatologists” cited by Mr. Wiener POSSIBLY assert conclusions that they mean anyone to take as valid?

And in light of what we now know – courtesy of the CRU communications infodump – how can any of these “26 leading climatologists” (who are almost certainly either knowingly complicit in the CRU communicators' collusion or “useful idiots” too timid or too politically correct to have challenged the fraudulent “settled science”) be considered trustworthy?

If their conclusions today are based on the fabricated data and bogus models of the AGW high priesthood, just what the hell are those conclusions worth?

Mr. Wiener is a flaming liar, front to back, and should be dropped from the staff of The Washington Independent with the Jayson Blair Integrity in Journalism award nailed to his forehead.

What a strange article. The hackings show how “denialists” are refused peer reviews, and that the pro-climate change research is fraudulent, and as evidence to the contrary, we should look at the very research that would be pushed and peer reviewed by these corrupt process? Please!

On “an insider did it”, that is a possibility. But there are other, scarier possibilities, as well.

http://itsteatime.net/blogs/blog4.php/2009/11/2…

The timing is alarming.

As a comp sec professional, but global warming critic… I am not for this means of debate. I find it unnecessary. The tactics being used and the science should be all too transparent to people already — people interested in the truth.

If these guys did get onto something with man caused global warming, honestly, I would be behind it. As it stands, I do not believe they are interested in truth at all… as even they have well stated here:

“As we all know, this isn’t about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.”

* From: Edward Cook

That line from the CRU hacked logs is the one that really floors me. It is clearly deeply well thought out. Very memorable. And it very well expresses my own impression of these “scientists”.

I only wish they would stand up and be frank and honest to the public as they have been in private.

But, if anybody needed such statements to understand this issue, I think… they have some very serious problems with their built in BS detector.

Shame on you, this is the greatest scientific fraud in modern history, you are not going to cover this up.

Nobody's listening anymore.

Yes, “Mr. Wiener” (if that even is your real name), you are the problemiest problem of them all. For while the peer-reviewed scry-entists try to predict and manipulate the future by cooking their data to a delicious golden-brown, it is only through the callowness of free-pressers (or should I say freedom-oppressors) like yourself that such malfeasant malefactors as the IPCC can come to influence the public policy of a polity and pristine, perfect, and unpretentious as The American Public's. How much did they pay to get to you, sir? What's your price?!

Seriously though, how much? Because times are tight right now, and I could really use the extra conspiracy money these days.

Dear Mr Aaron Wiener, you did not “picked apart” anything !
Where is the decent analysis of the climate-gate record ?

Do you have any decent grammar/syntax-analysis skills or does this “science stuff” just make you fell bored or is it too difficult for you to comprehend what's really going on ?

A change in career may help ?

Is it difficult accepting the explicit fraud aspect
of this CLIMATE-GATE scandal ?

What's wrong, ….
Al Gore, IPCC et al
have surprised you and they are not what you expected ?

Fraud is fraud and the FRAUD is very apparent in the CLIMATE-GATE record.
You can sugar coat it anyway you want to suit the agenda of your masters but still fraud is FRAUD.

The “The Copenhagen Diagnosis” still operates on the fallacy (unproven hypothesis) that man-made CO2 predominantly drives climate. Any person knowledgable of the Earth's environmental/geological historical record realises that much more extreme climate change has occurred in the past when compared with at least the last 100 years of climate change; both climate changes being predominantly natural in origin.

These “Copenhagen” guys are connected with the fraudsters of the CLIMATE-GATE scandal.

It appears you are a member of the “collective” that seeks to “dumb down” the masses so your “climate alarmism” related agenda gets accepted as a false truth.

Well, sorry, … some of us are not the “cattle” you'd like us to be.

——————————————
To Al Gore, IPCC et al

CLIMATE-GATE has arrived !
THE JIG IS UP !
TIME TO PAY THE PIPER !
——————————————

The climate has alays changed and always will. Moreover it has changed to a greater extent and at a greater rate than now, as any internet or literature search under 'abrupt climate change' will reveal.

What is needed is an established cause-and-effect relationship between a visible human signal in global climate data and an aspect of human activity. With regard to carbon dioxide, this signal is not seen, so there is nothing to examine for causality. This point was made in drafts of IPCC SAR.

The fact that the climate is changing is no reason to believe or disbelieve in the abstract concept of manmade climate change.

These leaked documents confirm what we already knew and makes it more difficult for the media to ignore the AGW fraud.

Millions of holes have already been poked in this “Chicken Little” theory. In response, it's indignant and sullen proponents could only fall back on name-calling.

But all along, the science (& especially the math) have been obviously weak to anyone who gave it a cursory glance.

This article reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons where Homer gets food poisoning from eating some expired meat he purchased at the Kwik-E Mart. When Homer confronts Apu, he offers him two five pound buckets of expired shrimp to placate him.

I want my 2 minutes back that this useless article stole.

Oh dear, the climate alarmists are really on the back foot now scratching at anything they can whip up. What really amuses me is how there defense to the emails have been that they were taken out of context. How can “The fact is we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.” be considered out of context?

The best reason to ignore the Washington Independent is the article given above. You win the Dan Rather Award for Journalistic Goodthink.

Actually the e-mails are quite incriminating for anyone who reads them with an open mind. There's no innocent explanation for cherry-picking data, marginalizing anyone who disagrees with one's own conclusions, and deleting data rather than sharing it with someone who might examine it objectively. These charlatans were caught accidentally telling the truth about a massive fraud.
Anyone who really knows anything about science knew long ago that the books were being cooked. What are the odds against 3000 studies all reaching the same conclusion as the global warming alarmists have claimed? About the same as a banana republic dictator actually getting 99.9% of the votes in an election. It just doesn't happen unless the fix is in.

The guy writing this argument is just another religious fraud of bad will and low intelligence. 26 scientists say that global warming is worse than the IPCC (already proven liars) thought? 26! Who in gods name cares! The idea that you would even use this ANY kind of an argument for AGW is disgustingly pathetic. And these 26 jerk offs are for the COPENHAGEN treaty which is the BIGGEST one world government treaty of all time – which totally only seeks to rob the united states and it's middle class of most of its freedoms and wealth. People need to wake up real quick and smell the rats and hear the snakes hissing. Climategate proved what all the AWG skeptics have been saying for 15 years- that there is a climate of collusion and dishonesty- which is not being regulated. Now finaly someone from the outside went and did what the IPCC could not regulate for itself. These people should g to jail for a long time. And if they used federal grants- then this is by definition breaking federal law- which means an automatic investigation by the FBI.

At let this be a lesson and a warning to all and anyone out there who knows of ANY scientific data that is being skewed or falsified- you better come forward with what you know now before you too are exposed- or even worse thrown under the buss by one of the other people you have been in communication with.

You really have to be kidding – the climate models have now proven to be WRONG

Just think about it for one moment – during the past decade, temperatures have been flat – everyone now agrees, it is in the private emails.

That is during the decade in which more carbon dioxide has been pumped into the atmosphere than in any other decade.

The climate models are WRONG. Carbon dioxide is NOT causing whatever you want to point to on the Earth.

The Earth is always changing – one needs to distinquish what is natural and what is not.

The climate models have never even attempted to do that.

The main problem here is that people have tried to REASON with the global warming believers and they refust to accept simple logic.

,.

Give me TENS of billions in Climate Change money EVERY YEAR….and, yeah…I'll get you boatloads of scientist that….'predict'….'diagnosis'….'show'…. 'have links'…..whatever you want. Just write the checks, it's hard to get a easy, no heavy lifting scare the children and liberal arts majors job.

Aaron

I would be so much better if you acted like an adult and admitted that you were wrong about global warming.

You didn't “pick apart” anything – otherwise your grand analysis would be outlined here.

Instead, you simply repeat another report, one that is based on the same faulty data and alarmist motivations.

It really is a laugh.

.

There is so much more to why man made global warming is a bunch of crap. I was watching the travel channel and saw a tourist destination you can visit off the coast of France (western France or Southern France, I can't exactly remember). There is a cave at least 37 feet down, in which there are large numbers of cave drawings. Either these guys had some pretty sweet prehistoric scuba gear, or the sea level has been rising slowly for a couple thousand years. Mediveal archeological sites in Swiss glaciers, Greenland being called GREENLAND and having pre ice age settlements. The evidence is everywhere that the earth changes climate, regardless of how many coal fired power plants or cow farts you have. This whole thing sickens me, but my hat is off to the whistleblower, whoever it is.

And one more thing. Aaron W., you're either an idiot or a very loyal scapegoat. In either event, your article is pretty weak.

Did you even read the leaked e-mails? Their content, at a minimum, casts doubt on almost all your “proofs” of Global Warming.

On the other hand, I didn't really need the e-mails except as confirmation of what my thermometer has been telling me for the last decade.

Um, there is plenty of evidence to contradict every single thing you have used as your grand argument of proof.

Climatologists from all over the world have noticed that, in fact, every planet in the solar system warmed during the years of 1960 to 1990 and that since 2002 the temperature of the Earth has risen 0.0 degrees.

Is it so hard for you to grasp that global “warming” is nothing more than greed driven lies?

Hey, go green. I, for one, would like there to be less pollution, but don't you dare defend this “science” to support something like a carbon tax and stop yelling about individual “carbon footprints” because that kind of fascist talk leads to the few lording over the many and every breath made by a human, being counted and tallied as something vile instead of the miracle each one is.

Hop in bed with Inhofe, wake up with fleas

An organization is discredited by evidence that shows that they put their agenda ahead of the science, so your argument for why we should not ignore them is a study by the discredited organization? That sounds like some faulty logic to me.

Aaron Wiener, how could you lie so maliciously by trying to prop up this fraudulent hoax about global warming. Any true thinking person knows there is no science behind anthropogenic global warming!

Utter rubbish. This is laughable. Based on what? More fraudulent data from the AGW scam industry that is hell bent on protecting its paychecks, profits, and Leftist political agenda?

[...] The Best Reason to Ignore ‘Climategate’: The Climate Really Is Changing [...]

PROPAGANDA…PROPAGANDA…PROPAGANDA….You, Aaron Wiener may be either an idiot or in on this horrible hoax. The e-mails clearly show conspiracy & manipulation of data.

By the way I live in Charleston, SC where it is normally warm & mild up through Christmas. Oh my gosh- it's not gone over 61 degrees this week so far….

The sky is falling, the sky is falling, the sky is falling….we need to tax the people to save the planet!

GO AWAY YOU FRAUD!!!!

A poll released in January 2009 called “Examining the Scientific Consensus
on Climate Change”. Two questions:
1. When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?
2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

3146 scientists responded with 90% of participants answering “risen” to question 1 and 82% answered yes to question 2
Of those who responded, 79 have their background in climatology and have published at least half of thier papers on that subject. Of these specialists, 96.2% (76 of 79) answered “risen” to question 1 and 97.4% (75 of 77) answered yes to question 2

If either of you can honestly say that you think that 3000 randomly sampled scientists are all corrupt and in it for distorting the facts then you're all dumb… For you to jump all on these people as if there is a giant conspiracy is idiot… your politicians are paid off by oil companies but yet this is the thing you all jump on?

Also for the record, with regards to Mann's “trick” to show the decline…
Mann made the regrettable decision of instrumental temperature data on his graphs for the last 40 years… his reason for doing so was because in fossil pine records there is a large discrepancy close to modern times in that these records show that the last 50 years have been cooling despite our instrumental and geomorphologic evidence which shows it is warming… Therefore, he should have left the record at 1960 as the last date or so… because you cant include the cooling data from the pine because it is obviously skewed… but he substituted it for real temperatures which are more accurate and not just proxies…this is unfortunate but not the Large cover up scandal you are all implicating him in. It is bad scientific methodology but if you read up on the subject and know the context then that it all it is.

Aaron,
You are nothing but a piece of s***. I hate you more than anybody else in the entire world. I fart in your general direction.
Sincerely,
Balls

Dr_r,
I am surprised that you bring up that poll from American Geophysical Union (AGU), “Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change”. First of all, that's not science… IT'S A POLL! Secondly, it appears that you too are being less than honest regarding the obvious bias in that poll. The follow up article in July, “Further Comment on 'Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change'” eloquently points out the poll's major flaw. (http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009EO270…).

As to your second post (below), call it what you like, but a true scientist would not use a “trick” to hide the truth. Dr_r, you are being quite charitable by referring to Michael Mann's manipulation of the data (to create his discredited “Hockey Stick Graph”) as a “regrettable decision.” I too could be charitable if I thought that Mann's motive for that “regrettable decision” was innocent. However, after reading the leaked e-mails from CRU, it is obvious that his motives are far from innocent.

This is a very serious matter. Dr_r, in your first post (below) you brought up financial motives by stating, ” your politicians are paid off by oil companies,” however America will suffer the greatest loss if our President signs on to anything at Copenhagen or if congress passes “Cap and Trade,” and all based on anti-science propping up this man-made global warming hoax.

I, for one, would like to thank “CHRISJAY” for the incredibly insightful and illuminating commentary concerning a Senator and arthropods or worse. Brevity, it seems, is indeed the soul of wit—unless, of course, one is witless.

You get the sense that a really big story is developing when AGW supporters have to write articles to tell people to ignore it.

“This just in….Please ignore Climategate! Thank you.” What a joke. LOL

Any real scientist should be outraged by the attempts to suppress dissenting views, and the refusals to share data and methodologies. Perhaps it's too much to expect the vast majority of the population who have no scientific or engineering training to understand this. It is clearly too much to expect most journalists to understand this.

To the author: Just one question: “How can you use the documents where this scandal is partly based on as a reference in your article?” As a reader I want a independent source. The mails are about the figures shown in the reports from IPCC and much other reports and scientific articels. Any publication refering to these publications can not be scene as facts anymore. A journalist should know this. Rule 1 check your source!
Second of all. It's not the job of a journalist to convince people they bring the news and leave there own opinion at home! rule number 2 for a journalist.

Try again and now with correct figures!

If global warming is real, it is most likely caused by the CO2 emitted by the cow manure scattered all over the postings of this author. It's pure BS! How can anyone say, with a straight face, that falsifying data to promote a false 'global warming' theory, which would be used for policy-making in order to steal more of the people's money via carbon-taxes is not 'that incriminating?' Is this a joke? These so-called scientists are a fraud and should go to prison… and any politician that uses 'CO2 emissions' as an excuse to tax us more, or to limit our freedoms, not only should be voted out, but impeached as well. We will no longer allow this criminal government to defecate all over us, especially with goofy, pathetic 'end-of-times' claims that the planet will die if we don't pay carbon taxes so Al-Gore (and his eco-investments) and the world banks can put in their pockets. If you think the Earth is hot, move to Mars and leave the rest of us alone… please..

Mr. Wiener-

Right now your “side” has ZERO creditbility. The entire work of evidence is a fraud from the very bedrock studies forward. A fraud and a lie. And in spite of this, you are trying to put forth evidence that supports this fraud. Do you realize how ignorant that is? You're trying to give evidence to support something that is a complete lie. ZERO credibility. None, zip, nada.

Aaron, there are so many outright lies in your article that I scarcely know where to begin.

But instead of taking the time to pick them apart one-by-one, which would take all day, allow me to engage you in a little rudimentary math.

Ice core samples show that for the last 400,000 years, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has fluctuated between 200 parts per million (ppm) and 300 ppm. CO2 levels in the atmosphere are now around 380 ppm, and it's this increase of 80 ppm that's got the warmers' panties all in a knot.

If you take 80 and divide it by 1,000,000 you come out with 0.00008.

Now, if you move the decimal point two places to the right to convert the number to percentage terms, you come out with the fact that this 80 ppm increase in CO2 represents only 0.008% of the Earth's atmosphere.

That's eight one-thousandths of one percent, Aaron. Roll that number around in your head for a while: Eight one-thousandths of one percent.

Now, I would like for you to try and tell me with a straight face how such an infinitessimally minute alteration in the composition of the Earth's atmosphere could, in and of itself, cause a significant increase in global temperatures.

That's right … It can't, as anyone with even an ounce of common sense could readily tell you.

Climate change happens. Always has, always will. But it is caused by periodic fluctuations in the energy output of the sun, topographic changes to the Earth's surface that alter weather patterns, and periodic perturbations in the Earth's orbit around the sun and in its angle of rotation.

Compared to these factors, mankind's burning of fossil fuels for a mere 200 years is laughable in its insignificance.

Just keep lying and it will all go away. Way to use resources and scientists
who are in on the scam. Great journalism-what a joke
Deny Deny Deny. Attack Attack Attack

Way to use facts and references from scientists that are in on the scam = Great Responsible Journalism Aaron

- when embarrassed, wrong, and caught lying/ manipulating data for personal gain and trying to steal taxes- Just keep the liberal philosophy – Lie Lie Lie and Attack Attack Attack Good stuff you should be proud

Oh course the climate is changing.

It always has.

And always will.

The problem with the IPCC, from whom you still haven't learned to take info with a grain of salt, has proven itself to be corrupt, which taints ALL their data. The very data that Global Warming Legislation is based on.

The warmist's position on this seems to be “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”…(skeptic) “But I can see him pulling the levers”…..(warmists) You're taking it out of context”

AND WHERE DID YOU GET YOUR DOCTORATE? OUTHOUSE U? NO ONE CARES WHAT THE GED CROWD THINKS IDIOT

AND WHERE DID YOU GET YOUR DOCTORATE? OUTHOUSE U? NO ONE CARES WHAT THE GED CROWD THINKS IDIOT

when embarrassed, wrong, and caught lying/ manipulating data for personal gain and trying to steal taxes- Just keep the liberal philosophy – Lie Lie Lie and Attack Attack Attack Good stuff you should be proud