Some of the world’s top climate change scientists have found themselves having to defend their internal communications after thousands of emails were exposed on the Internet last week. The emails, stolen from Britain’s Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia, show the inner workings of the elite group of scientists and have those involved struggling to explain the contents.
Skeptics of the manmade climate change theory have seized on the messages saying the messages are evidence of collusion among the scientists to falsify and hide data. The scientists for their part have said the messages are being ‘taken out of context.’
Website RealClimate which serves as a publicity clearinghouse for many of the scientists said the things being seized upon were “cherry-picked out-of-context phrases.” Gavin Schmidt, a climate scientist for the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies, said, “Partial views of that process without the full context would make it extremely easy to jump to unwarranted conclusions.”
- Examiner.com complete coverage: All the latest on Climategate
- Al Gore fuels climate change skeptics with cover of new book
Kevin Trenberth, head of the Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, and Michael Mann and director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State featured prominently in the emails. Both men defended the messages saying that without proper context they cannot be understood. Trenberth said, “The unfortunate thing about this is that people can cherry pick and take things out of context.”
Many however have said that there is little needed context required to interpret the messages. One of the most frequently discussed topics in the messages were how the scientists were going to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests from skeptics.
Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit, sent messages to fellow scientists clearly asking them to delete email correspondence. In another message he indicated he did not want to share a piece of data and said “I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone.”
Other messages from the scientists include other things that would appear to be clearly understood, no matter the context. In one, scientist Mick Kelly comments that he would modify a graph so as to not have to explain the recent cooling of the globe. Trenberth voiced frustration about the inability of computer models to replicate the cooling saying, “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
The University, in conjunction with law enforcement, has launched an investigation to track down the source of the leak. Due to the extensive and targeted nature of the emails and documents that were released, speculation is running high that it was an ‘inside job’ by someone within the University. If that were to be the case, it would certainly put more cracks in the so-called ‘consensus’ behind manmade climate change.
Climate Change Examiner Facebook Page Climate Change Examiner on Twitter
Or be notified by email when a new article from the Climate Change Examiner is posted.
Click the 'Subscribe' link at the top or bottom of the article and enter your email address.
Comments
BUSTED!
The emails were not stolen. They were freely and openly downloaded off a open server. Hacking sounds so romantic to make a good news story but its not true. peace
I wonder if MD actually believes that.
If so, you are dumber than dirt. But I doubt it, and in that case you are a liar. Jus' sayin', Nothing personal.
Best,
D
I wonder if the em-ess-em will report the power the scientists had over nature and the universe.
Will they report nature reversing itself now that these stolen e-mails have been revealed?
Will they report all the glaciers reversing course? The globe and oceans cooling? Animals moving south and downhill? Spring coming later and plants blooming later? Green-up later? Corals unbleaching?
I highly doubt it, as the em-ess-em is in on the great globul conspiracy!!!
Say, whaddya say 'MD'?
Can you see nature reversing itself as we speak?
Do you see changes?
I see birds moving south and animals moving downhill in the past couple days. Do YOU think the em-ess-em will report it?!? H--- NO! They're in on it!
*snork*
Denialists: they crack everyone up.
Best,
D
I think a lot of these scientists work for public supported Univ so their email are in the public domain, at least the ones living and working in the U.S.
I didn't comment what is happening with the planets climate.
My statement was concerning how the emails were acquired.
using simple unix command on the CRU's ftp server as anonymous login before it was released. now they have password protected the ftp server. prior to the release it was open. most ftp servers have anonymous login enabled by default. while sending anonymous as the username and sometimes requiring a email address as the password. information is gathered this way everyday online and it happens that sometimes people forget or accidentally put info in a area that should not have anonymous access. simple error but happens all the time. a simple script can easily be set to anonymously connect to any server you want and have it download new entries automatically. harvesting information and sometimes getting lucky. human error no doubt. but its good to know that we are still human and can make mistakes.
Ah. So poor security procedures = not stolen.
Got it. All clear.
Best,
D
Obviously the legality of the release will be established at some point in the future. If they were left open to the public on an improperly secured server, it would be hard to say they were “stolen” as they were available in the public domain. No doubt that is what a court would say.
IMHO, whoever leaked these must have been on the inside of CRU thus potentially setting the stage for a whistleblower defense if they are caught. Considering the content of the emails, that defense might very well work although while I know Britain does have whistleblower protections, I don’t know if they would apply in this case.
I agree BG; They're BUSTED!!! They can't defend their lies anymore, try as they
might.
Anyone know if James Hansen has been committed to a mental institution yet?
If not, why? Let him, Ban Ki-Moon, Carol Browner, and Cass Sunstein all share a padded cell together.
"IMHO, whoever leaked these must have been on the inside of CRU thus potentially setting the stage for a whistleblower defense if they are caught."
Yeah, uploading to RealClimate and a Russian server they way they did is what whistleblowers do. Sure. Forceful argument, there. Keep such cunning analysis coming Tony. Keep talking. Keep thinking just like that. Plausible, yes sir. Follow that line and report every day with your thoughts. Please.
Best,
D
Dano,
Are you saying it isn’t plausible that the person is a whistleblower? It seems that would be more likely than someone from the outside getting in and assembling all of the emails and documents that were released. Your comment offers nothing to dispute that.
And, a fair warning to you and all who submit comments… The comment section here can and will be moderated if need be. I don’t care if you agree or disagree with another comment or the story at hand but comments will be respectful and maintain reasonable decorum. Comments that belittle, cuss, resort to childish name calling, etc will be deleted. Your cooperation in maintaining a useful dialogue would be appreciated.
"Are you saying it isn’t plausible that the person is a whistleblower? It seems that would be more likely than someone from the outside getting in and assembling all of the emails and documents that were released. Your comment offers nothing to dispute that."
I'm saying you have nothing to go on but speculation.
Have you spoken to a systems person? Anyone at a server farm or security provider? Why uploading to a .ru server? Why have it sit for several days before blowing? Why the selective e-mails? Why not more concrete e-mails? That is: someone on the inside would have gone right to the core and released the real goods. The InterTubes has only been speculating and quote-mining. An insider would have had goods. Why are there no goods? Why the .ru and RC server? Why the delay? Why not to Moonie Times and Morano right away, or NYT or WaPo or Times of London? Where is the there there?
These are basic questions reporters ask. Are you a reporter?
Best,
D
I never said my comment was anything but a comment. I believe I even started with IMHO – The ‘O’ stands for Opinion. Neither the story nor my comment was a factual report on the topic of how the data was obtained.
You seem to have a great deal of knowledge about reporting and journalism. I would highly recommend you take a look here – that might provide the outlet you seek. www.examiner.com/about_examiner/
What a bunch of twinkies! I've scanned the emails and they seem legit. Providing data and models and anything else to an impartial commission is one thing--being expected to hand it over to a partisan hack trying to destroy you is something else entirely. As far as making adjustments to data and results, there are a lot of assumptions that go into it because of missing data, so you need to make assumptions that fit the observations you do have, and what you know about how things work. And condensing the writing to the bullets that were created from the results in the first place is just trying to get to the most important points. The IPCC has tons of supporting documentation, if you aren't too lazy to look for it. So it's all a myth, eh? Tell that to the Inuit villagers in Alaska. Explain the increase in Northern Hemisphere temperatures over the last century. Pull you head out of your butt!!
Those “partisan hacks” were able to expose errors more than once – big errors. That alone proves that the CRU alarmists are incapable to determining the accuracy of their own work. If their data is correct they should have no problem turning it over and certainly something as important as climate data should be readily available to the public anyway. Instead they chose to hide it and even delete the original raw data.
It took these "scientists" over a week to craft their defense because there is no defense for the kind of "science" these people were doing. Whenever you hear that a "consensus of scientists" says so and that "the debate is over", look out. Scientists were still devising experiments to test relativity at the end of the twentieth century! This effort is agenda-driven,
agendas of the governments that give out the grants and in many cases, those who receive them. Science is supposed to be a search for the truth, wherever that truth may lead us. Their data did not support the desired results and thus it had to be reworked. This is the worst kind of fraud and these charlatans need to resign.
Hey AG, it's been warming for the last 30,000 years or so! There was once almost a mile thick ice sheet where I live. Did we do that? NO! How about the desert southwest of The United States, There was once a robust community of cliff dwellers that built impressive adobe structures. About 800 years ago they had to leave-BECAUSE THE CLIMATE CHANGED and the land would no longer support them. The IPCC admits there has been no increase in temps since 1998. The sun's activity is way down but the "scientists" won't consider it in their modeling. Who is the twinkie now? Pull you own head out of your own butt. This is NOT science, it's a religion and you're an "EARTH WORSHIPER"!
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!