Global Warming’s Blue Dress Moment? The CRU EMail Hack Scandal November 20th, 2009 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
The recent hacking of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) computer system has led to the release of hundreds, if not thousands, of e-mails which — if real — reveal the tactics and motivations of some of the top Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scientists. I hesitate to name names, but there are several websites now buzzing with all of the details and sample e- mails. The e-mails I have seen appear genuine, with obscure scientific details and language that would take considerable effort to create as part of a hoax. A few of the sites covering this unfolding story are:
While it is too early to tell just yet, there seems to be considerable damning evidence that data have been hidden or destroyed to avoid Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) data requests; data have been manipulated in order to get results that best suit the pro- anthropogenic global warming agenda of the IPCC; e-mails that contain incriminating discussions are being deleted. And, on the bright side, we skeptics seem to be quite a thorn in the side of the IPCC.
In reading these e-mails from the ‘other side’ of the scientific debate I am particularly amazed at the mindset of a few of these scientists. I exchange e-mails with other like-minded (read ‘skeptical’) scientists, as do the IPCC scientists with their peers. But never do I hear of anyone manipulating climate data to achieve a certain end. I must say that I am pleased to see that NCAR scientist Kevin Trenberth admits that it is a “travesty” that no one can explain the lack of global warming in recent years.
I think there is a good chance that this was an inside job…either a disgruntled employee at CRU, or someone who is simply getting fed up with the politicization of the IPCC’s science and wanted to reveal some of the inner workings of the IPCC process. I’m sure that further revelations will arise in the coming days.
As of this writing, the BBC is the first mainstream news source to cover the story. But instead of discussing the content of any of the e- mails, the BBC is focusing on the illegal nature of the computer system breach. An expert was quoted who alluded to the contentious nature of the global warming debate, and how both sides would resort to tricks to help their side.
That’s pretty rich. If the hacked e-mails — with incriminating content — just happened to be Sarah Palin’s, does ANYONE believe that news reports would avoid disclosing the content of those e-mails?
> Global Warming’s Blue Dress Moment? The CRU EMail Hack Scandal > November 20th, 2009 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
> The recent hacking of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic > Research Unit (CRU) computer system has led to the release of > hundreds, if not thousands, of e-mails which — if real — reveal the > tactics and motivations of some of the top Intergovernmental Panel on > Climate Change (IPCC) scientists. I hesitate to name names, but there > are several websites now buzzing with all of the details and sample e- > mails. The e-mails I have seen appear genuine, with obscure scientific > details and language that would take considerable effort to create as > part of a hoax. A few of the sites covering this unfolding story are:
> While it is too early to tell just yet, there seems to be considerable > damning evidence that data have been hidden or destroyed to avoid > Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) data requests; data have been > manipulated in order to get results that best suit the pro- > anthropogenic global warming agenda of the IPCC; e-mails that contain > incriminating discussions are being deleted. And, on the bright side, > we skeptics seem to be quite a thorn in the side of the IPCC.
> In reading these e-mails from the ‘other side’ of the scientific > debate I am particularly amazed at the mindset of a few of these > scientists. I exchange e-mails with other like-minded (read > ‘skeptical’) scientists, as do the IPCC scientists with their peers. > But never do I hear of anyone manipulating climate data to achieve a > certain end. I must say that I am pleased to see that NCAR scientist > Kevin Trenberth admits that it is a “travesty” that no one can explain > the lack of global warming in recent years.
> I think there is a good chance that this was an inside job…either a > disgruntled employee at CRU, or someone who is simply getting fed up > with the politicization of the IPCC’s science and wanted to reveal > some of the inner workings of the IPCC process. I’m sure that further > revelations will arise in the coming days.
> As of this writing, the BBC is the first mainstream news source to > cover the story. But instead of discussing the content of any of the > e- mails, the BBC is focusing on the illegal nature of the computer > system breach. An expert was quoted who alluded to the contentious > nature of the global warming debate, and how both sides would resort > to tricks to help their side.
> That’s pretty rich. If the hacked e-mails — with incriminating content > — just happened to be Sarah Palin’s, does ANYONE believe that news > reports would avoid disclosing the content of those e-mails?
> (hehe! if this is real it's gonna fuck up the wad in many lefty > lunatic warmer panties!)
Quotes from the NY Times article on this:
' Some skeptics asserted Friday that the correspondence revealed an effort to withhold scientific information. “This is not a smoking gun; this is a mushroom cloud,” said Patrick J. Michaels, a climatologist who has long faulted evidence pointing to human-driven warming and is criticized in the documents.'
and again:
'In a 1999 e-mail exchange about charts showing climate patterns over the last two millenniums, Phil Jones, a longtime climate researcher at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit, said he had used a “trick” employed by another scientist, Michael Mann, to “hide the decline” in temperatures.'
Just in time for Copenhagen, too.
-- Saint Séimí mac Liam Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve Prophet of The Great Tagger Canonized December '99
> > Global Warming’s Blue Dress Moment? The CRU EMail Hack Scandal > > November 20th, 2009 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
> > The recent hacking of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic > > Research Unit (CRU) computer system has led to the release of > > hundreds, if not thousands, of e-mails which — if real — reveal the > > tactics and motivations of some of the top Intergovernmental Panel on > > Climate Change (IPCC) scientists. I hesitate to name names, but there > > are several websites now buzzing with all of the details and sample e- > > mails. The e-mails I have seen appear genuine, with obscure scientific > > details and language that would take considerable effort to create as > > part of a hoax. A few of the sites covering this unfolding story are:
> > While it is too early to tell just yet, there seems to be considerable > > damning evidence that data have been hidden or destroyed to avoid > > Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) data requests; data have been > > manipulated in order to get results that best suit the pro- > > anthropogenic global warming agenda of the IPCC; e-mails that contain > > incriminating discussions are being deleted. And, on the bright side, > > we skeptics seem to be quite a thorn in the side of the IPCC.
> > In reading these e-mails from the ‘other side’ of the scientific > > debate I am particularly amazed at the mindset of a few of these > > scientists. I exchange e-mails with other like-minded (read > > ‘skeptical’) scientists, as do the IPCC scientists with their peers. > > But never do I hear of anyone manipulating climate data to achieve a > > certain end. I must say that I am pleased to see that NCAR scientist > > Kevin Trenberth admits that it is a “travesty” that no one can explain > > the lack of global warming in recent years.
> > I think there is a good chance that this was an inside job…either a > > disgruntled employee at CRU, or someone who is simply getting fed up > > with the politicization of the IPCC’s science and wanted to reveal > > some of the inner workings of the IPCC process. I’m sure that further > > revelations will arise in the coming days.
> > As of this writing, the BBC is the first mainstream news source to > > cover the story. But instead of discussing the content of any of the > > e- mails, the BBC is focusing on the illegal nature of the computer > > system breach. An expert was quoted who alluded to the contentious > > nature of the global warming debate, and how both sides would resort > > to tricks to help their side.
> > That’s pretty rich. If the hacked e-mails — with incriminating content > > — just happened to be Sarah Palin’s, does ANYONE believe that news > > reports would avoid disclosing the content of those e-mails?
> > (hehe! if this is real it's gonna fuck up the wad in many lefty > > lunatic warmer panties!)
> Quotes from the NY Times article on this:
> ' Some skeptics asserted Friday that the correspondence revealed an > effort to withhold scientific information. “This is not a smoking gun; > this is a mushroom cloud,” said Patrick J. Michaels, a climatologist who > has long faulted evidence pointing to human-driven warming and is > criticized in the documents.'
> and again:
> 'In a 1999 e-mail exchange about charts showing climate patterns over the > last two millenniums, Phil Jones, a longtime climate researcher at the > East Anglia Climate Research Unit, said he had used a “trick” employed by > another scientist, Michael Mann, to “hide the decline” in temperatures.'
> Just in time for Copenhagen, too.
> -- > Saint Séimí mac Liam > Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve > Prophet of The Great Tagger > Canonized December '99
I'll not expect the copenhagen crowd to pay much attention.
> On Nov 21, 4:39 pm, "Séimí mac Liam" <gwyd...@comcast.nospam.net> > wrote: >> seymore <seymoredonk...@yahoo.com> wrote >> innews:dc629a00-0ce0-4549-b73d-7 > d5001f00...@x31g2000yqx.googlegroups.com:
>> > Global Warming’s Blue Dress Moment? The CRU EMail Hack Scandal >> > November 20th, 2009 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
>> > The recent hacking of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic >> > Research Unit (CRU) computer system has led to the release of >> > hundreds, if not thousands, of e-mails which — if real — reveal the >> > tactics and motivations of some of the top Intergovernmental Panel >> > on Climate Change (IPCC) scientists. I hesitate to name names, but >> > there are several websites now buzzing with all of the details and >> > sample e- mails. The e-mails I have seen appear genuine, with >> > obscure scientific details and language that would take >> > considerable effort to create as part of a hoax. A few of the sites >> > covering this unfolding story are:
>> > While it is too early to tell just yet, there seems to be >> > considerable damning evidence that data have been hidden or >> > destroyed to avoid Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) data requests; >> > data have been manipulated in order to get results that best suit >> > the pro- anthropogenic global warming agenda of the IPCC; e-mails >> > that contain incriminating discussions are being deleted. And, on >> > the bright side, we skeptics seem to be quite a thorn in the side >> > of the IPCC.
>> > In reading these e-mails from the ‘other side’ of the scientific >> > debate I am particularly amazed at the mindset of a few of these >> > scientists. I exchange e-mails with other like-minded (read >> > ‘skeptical’) scientists, as do the IPCC scientists with their peers > . >> > But never do I hear of anyone manipulating climate data to achieve >> > a certain end. I must say that I am pleased to see that NCAR >> > scientist Kevin Trenberth admits that it is a “travesty” that no >> > one can expl > ain >> > the lack of global warming in recent years.
>> > I think there is a good chance that this was an inside job…either a >> > disgruntled employee at CRU, or someone who is simply getting fed >> > up with the politicization of the IPCC’s science and wanted to >> > reveal some of the inner workings of the IPCC process. I’m sure >> > that further revelations will arise in the coming days.
>> > As of this writing, the BBC is the first mainstream news source to >> > cover the story. But instead of discussing the content of any of >> > the e- mails, the BBC is focusing on the illegal nature of the >> > computer system breach. An expert was quoted who alluded to the >> > contentious nature of the global warming debate, and how both sides >> > would resort to tricks to help their side.
>> > That’s pretty rich. If the hacked e-mails — with incriminating cont > ent >> > — just happened to be Sarah Palin’s, does ANYONE believe that news >> > reports would avoid disclosing the content of those e-mails?
>> > (hehe! if this is real it's gonna fuck up the wad in many lefty >> > lunatic warmer panties!)
>> Quotes from the NY Times article on this:
>> ' Some skeptics asserted Friday that the correspondence revealed an >> effort to withhold scientific information. “This is not a smoking >> gun; this is a mushroom cloud,” said Patrick J. Michaels, a >> climatologist wh > o >> has long faulted evidence pointing to human-driven warming and is >> criticized in the documents.'
>> and again:
>> 'In a 1999 e-mail exchange about charts showing climate patterns over >> the last two millenniums, Phil Jones, a longtime climate researcher >> at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit, said he had used a “trick” >> employe > d by >> another scientist, Michael Mann, to “hide the decline” in temperature > s.'
>> Just in time for Copenhagen, too.
>> -- >> Saint Séimí mac Liam >> Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve >> Prophet of The Great Tagger >> Canonized December '99
> I'll not expect the copenhagen crowd to pay much attention.
> ...or ANY of the main stream liberal media.
> JD
Seems the warmers here aren't much interested either. Who'd a thunk it?
-- Saint Séimí mac Liam Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve Prophet of The Great Tagger Canonized December '99
>> On Nov 21, 4:39 pm, "Séimí mac Liam" <gwyd...@comcast.nospam.net> >> wrote: >>> seymore <seymoredonk...@yahoo.com> wrote >>> innews:dc629a00-0ce0-4549-b73d-7 >> d5001f00...@x31g2000yqx.googlegroups.com:
>>> > Global Warming's Blue Dress Moment? The CRU EMail Hack Scandal >>> > November 20th, 2009 by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
>>> > The recent hacking of the University of East Anglia's Climatic >>> > Research Unit (CRU) computer system has led to the release of >>> > hundreds, if not thousands, of e-mails which - if real - reveal the >>> > tactics and motivations of some of the top Intergovernmental Panel >>> > on Climate Change (IPCC) scientists. I hesitate to name names, but >>> > there are several websites now buzzing with all of the details and >>> > sample e- mails. The e-mails I have seen appear genuine, with >>> > obscure scientific details and language that would take >>> > considerable effort to create as part of a hoax. A few of the sites >>> > covering this unfolding story are:
>>> > While it is too early to tell just yet, there seems to be >>> > considerable damning evidence that data have been hidden or >>> > destroyed to avoid Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) data requests; >>> > data have been manipulated in order to get results that best suit >>> > the pro- anthropogenic global warming agenda of the IPCC; e-mails >>> > that contain incriminating discussions are being deleted. And, on >>> > the bright side, we skeptics seem to be quite a thorn in the side >>> > of the IPCC.
>>> > In reading these e-mails from the 'other side' of the scientific >>> > debate I am particularly amazed at the mindset of a few of these >>> > scientists. I exchange e-mails with other like-minded (read >>> > 'skeptical') scientists, as do the IPCC scientists with their peers >> . >>> > But never do I hear of anyone manipulating climate data to achieve >>> > a certain end. I must say that I am pleased to see that NCAR >>> > scientist Kevin Trenberth admits that it is a "travesty" that no >>> > one can expl >> ain >>> > the lack of global warming in recent years.
>>> > I think there is a good chance that this was an inside job.either a >>> > disgruntled employee at CRU, or someone who is simply getting fed >>> > up with the politicization of the IPCC's science and wanted to >>> > reveal some of the inner workings of the IPCC process. I'm sure >>> > that further revelations will arise in the coming days.
>>> > As of this writing, the BBC is the first mainstream news source to >>> > cover the story. But instead of discussing the content of any of >>> > the e- mails, the BBC is focusing on the illegal nature of the >>> > computer system breach. An expert was quoted who alluded to the >>> > contentious nature of the global warming debate, and how both sides >>> > would resort to tricks to help their side.
>>> > That's pretty rich. If the hacked e-mails - with incriminating cont >> ent >>> > - just happened to be Sarah Palin's, does ANYONE believe that news >>> > reports would avoid disclosing the content of those e-mails?
>>> > (hehe! if this is real it's gonna fuck up the wad in many lefty >>> > lunatic warmer panties!)
>>> Quotes from the NY Times article on this:
>>> ' Some skeptics asserted Friday that the correspondence revealed an >>> effort to withhold scientific information. "This is not a smoking >>> gun; this is a mushroom cloud," said Patrick J. Michaels, a >>> climatologist wh >> o >>> has long faulted evidence pointing to human-driven warming and is >>> criticized in the documents.'
>>> and again:
>>> 'In a 1999 e-mail exchange about charts showing climate patterns over >>> the last two millenniums, Phil Jones, a longtime climate researcher >>> at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit, said he had used a "trick" >>> employe >> d by >>> another scientist, Michael Mann, to "hide the decline" in temperature >> s.'
>>> Just in time for Copenhagen, too.
>>> -- >>> Saint Séimí mac Liam >>> Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve >>> Prophet of The Great Tagger >>> Canonized December '99
>> I'll not expect the copenhagen crowd to pay much attention.
>> ...or ANY of the main stream liberal media.
>> JD
> Seems the warmers here aren't much interested either. Who'd a thunk it?
> -- > Saint Séimí mac Liam > Carriagemaker to the court of Queen Maeve > Prophet of The Great Tagger > Canonized December '99
The silence is to be expected.<g> After all, why let a few facts spoil a good panic.
|
