.jpg)
Stolen emails and documents from a British climate science
server have shed light on the internal workings of climate
scientists seeking to advance the manmade climate change
theory.
As the contents of a hacked climate change unit’s server in Britain were exposed on the Internet Friday, the event had some of the scientists involved scrambling to explain their emails and skeptics believing they had found a smoking gun. On the surface, the emails seem to indicate scientists modified data to fit the anthropogenic global warming theory, tried to silence dissenting opinions and reflect a concerted effort to restrict access to climate data possibly by deleting it.
The emails and documents were illegally obtained from a server at Britain’s Climate Research Unit, University of East Anglia and then posted to a Russian server. From there, the file and its contents spread like wildfire across the Internet. Inside are over 1,000 emails and dozens of documents that detail private correspondence among some of the world’s top climate scientists.
A spokesman for the university said, “We are aware that information from a server used for research information in one area of the university has been made available on public websites.” Law enforcement is involved and is trying to track down the person responsible for leaking the emails. Speculation is high that it was an ‘inside job’ as the contents were all targeted toward the science and debate about manmade climate change.
-
Complete Climategate Coverage
ClimateGate - Climate center's server hacked revealing documents and emails
- Al Gore fuels climate change skeptics with cover of new book
Skeptics of the manmade climate change theory quickly poured over the messages and pointed to what the Australian Herald-Sun called “a scandal that is one of the greatest in modern science.” The emails point to a number of questionable actions by the scientists including the modification of data, destruction of data and evidence, collusion, admissions of errors in data and resistance to having their analysis scrutinized by outsiders.
Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit,
was the most active participant in the email
traffic. (Climatic Research Unit)
Emails from Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit, are arguably the most controversial. In multiple messages the director discusses his resistance to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests even alluding to destroying data rather than sharing it. In one message he says, “I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone.” Jones apparently considered ways to stymie or limit FOIA requests by “removing station data” and “omit some other countries” because “it would annoy them [those requesting the data].”
Jones also exhorts his colleagues to delete email discussions saying in an email to Michael Mann, “Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment - minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.”
The scientists also apparently struggled to account for the cooling the earth has seen over the last 10 years. One scientist, Mick Kelly, discussed giving a presentation and rather than include the cooling he said, “I’ll maybe cut the last few points off the filtered curve before I give the talk again as that’s trending down as a result of the end effects and the recent cold-ish years.”
Kevin Trenberth, a scientist with the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), was particularly frustrated by computer models that failed to predict the cooling. He said, “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 CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.”
Michael Mann is the creator of the discredited 'hocky stick graph'
that was included in IPCC reports. A version of the graph
appeared in Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth."
The scientists also did not approve of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) and its choices allowing opposing views to be heard. The group’s trade publication, Geophysical Research Letters (GRL) was targeted by Michael Mann as he wrote, “I’m not sure that GRL can be seen as an honest broker in these debates anymore.” He however acknowledged the publication's importance saying, “We can’t afford to lose GRL.”
Mann seemed particularly concerned about a ‘contrarian’ with the name Saiers, presumably James Saiers of the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies. “Apparently, the contrarians now have an “in” with GRL. This guy Saiers has a prior connection w/ the University of Virginia Dept. of Environmental Sciences [where Saiers completed his PhD] that causes m some unease,” Mann wrote.
Tom Wigley, a senior scientist in the Climate and Global Dynamics Division at NCAR, felt though that they could deal with Saiers by getting him removed from the AGU. “If you think that Saiers is in the greenhouse skeptics camp, then, if we can find documentary evidence of this, we could go through official AGU channels to get him ousted.”
Some have questioned the authenticity of the emails and documents with the university saying, “Because of the volume of this information we cannot currently confirm that all of this material is genuine.” Realclimate.org, a website that oftentimes serves as a publicist for many of the scientists, said the messages were ‘possibly edited’ but was unable to cite any examples where that may have occurred.
None of the scientists whose emails were exposed have disputed the contents within the archive. Jones, did not dispute the authenticity of the messages in an interview with TGIF Edition. Kevin Trenberth told Wired that “the email is genuine.” Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University said, "I'm not going to comment on the content of illegally obtained e-mails." Considering the incendiary nature of the emails one would expect those involved would have pointed out any messages that were illegitimate.
The discussion about climate change is at a fevered pitch and these emails and documents will likely damage the cause of those seeking to advance the manmade climate change theory. Those who doubt the theory have had great success this year in getting their voices heard and have been able to demonstrate that the ‘consensus’ in the scientific community on climate change is anything but.
The timing of their release is fortuitous for the skeptics as the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen is set to begin next month. Hopes for a treaty from the conference had already been dashed with the UN willing to settle for a ‘political agreement’ rather than a binding agreement.
The messages also could damage President Barack Obama's hope for cap and trade legislation, something that has already come under fire.
On the net:
- Searchable database of the CRU emails
- ClimateDepot - Updated page of sources about ClimateGate
- Climate Audit - CRU Correspondence
- Tom Nelson - Hadley hacked: Roundup with updates and hundreds of comments
- the Air Vent - Leaked FOIA files 62 mb of gold
- Watts Up With That? - Breaking News Story: CRU has apparently been hacked – hundreds of files released
- Herald-Sun - The warmist conspiracy: the emails that most damn Jones
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
For years,I've been telling my surroundings global warming is an enormous fraud.But people prefer to believe the lying scientists who take their theories not proven as realities
Nothing like a little illicit hacking to give the Climate Change denial movement some credibility.
Hey Ken,
Whatever it takes to get the the truth out... so how does an illegal hacking diminish the truth behind these emails? Hacking or not, the information is there, clean and clear - you have been duped.
Emma,
You presume the Emails are all legit and that context has not been misrepresented, something that Climate Change deniers engage in from time to time. I'm not all that jazzed over the validity of anything in Email anywhere being part of some factual permanent record. Being a techie who's been using Email for 17 plus years, I know that people are quite willing to engage in hyperbole from the anonymity of their home PC.
Ken:
Nothing like the Climate Change/Global Warming alarmists bending the TRUTH to make things go their way. When faced with the truth, those guys changed the outcomes. To me, it is FRAUD. Follow the money trail. The alarmists must prove their point or their funding goes bye-bye forever!
I think we need to take a serious look at having full transparency. Auditors need to be hired to examine what data sets these scientists have and how the scientists present it to the public.
What they are doing should not be tolerated since its being partly financed by the U.S. taxpayers.
I wonder why hasn't NASA Goddard's Hansen (owner of some leaked emails) still has not put on NASA's global warming front page that there were mistakes made in calculating rising temperatures? And why hasn't NASA's global warming front page(run by Hansen) say that the temperature corrections show that the 1930's were slightly hotter than right now?
Also, I am happy that you are doing excellent reporting. I have looked at many news articles regarding the emails, and yours is the best.
As a liberal I am ashamed not only with the scientists actions, but also with the response of the left.
I always believed in the high road. I believed that being a liberal means we are morally above Bush’s power hungry mob. That the Karl Rove’s of the world – to whom the end justify any mean are a right wing phenomenon.
The closing of the ranks by my fellow liberals in defense by of these despicable acts and their perpetrators is staggering.
These scientists are our own Karl Roves: Distort the truth, foreclose the opposition, control access to data and media, covertly undermine the descents, stonewall any scrutiny, break the law. Our own guys are doing every bit of the things we detested for so long.
And what are we doing? We excuse them. “Taken out of context”, “They are just human”. “Where is the smoking gun?”
Guys – we must be better than that. Maintain our moral ground. Don’t excuse these actions. Expel the offenders from our ranks.
We are better than this.
Whatever side of the fence you are on one thing is for sure, the actions of many that are being highlighted in these emails are anything but scientific.
This is what happens when a political agenda is formed & science is funded to back that agenda.
This is highlighted by the sacking & resignation of members of the Drug Advisory Council, the difference being they were unpaid advisers who were not given grants to support government policy.
Our planet exists for millions of years and it has survived many enormous climatic events like ice-ages, meteor impacts etc. Yet we are manipulated to believe that above all, mankind is considered capable to finally beat nature. Honestly, which educated person really believed in this hoax in the first place?
There are many just like Ken Grubb out there. No matter the science or the evidence in this case, they are so wedded to their religion, nothing will make them say "I was wrong".
www.cnbc.com/id/34093664/for/cnbc/
"Scientist: Leak of climate e-mails appalling"
Appalled perhaps, but apparently seems to authenticate the emails.
Great work on this story, Tony. hHopefully this will get the word out there on what has really been going on with behind the doors of these so called 'scientists'.
Were these labs accredited by UKAS or other members of the international quality cartel?
Fire there asses. Start legal precedings of fraud.
This is the watergate of the 21 century.
We are surely in a degenerate time if we refute a revealation because of how it was obtained.
"Kill that darned messenger, he's spoiling my scam"
The story is already out of the mainstream news this morning. Google news indexing had reference to it over the weekend; now gone. Maybe we should be calling it mediagate instead of climategate.
Where's the beef?
People,
Do not be shocked that scientists sell temselves to the higher bidder. Those of us who have been busy researching health issues have found out without any doubt the scientists sell themselves to Big Pharma fudging the data that is sent to the FDA for years and years.
Those actions are responsible for the death of millions of people in a decade. I mean millionss. You should count direct deaths from drugs and indirect deaths when people follow a treatement of the Mainstream Medicine instead of a treatment that could have saved their lives in othe "not approved" medical protocols.
I refuse to use the term "alternative" because it implies it is a substitution of something which is a "standard" and is not.
The "scientists for sale" shoul all be striken from their professional association membership and their degrees revoked.
Will any mankind oriented lawyer do humanity a service and sue for this goal?
The authorities of the university or institution these "scientists for sale" work for have the obligation to fire them pending review and suspend them immediately regardless of the science behind the issue, but just for the fact that they are CONSPIRING which is a Racketeering offense. Never mind if the information was stolen. That was a service to humanity, just like turning in a murderer.
Have you ever seen children starve to death Mr. Ken Grubb? Because that's what a global carbon tax will do. A global carbon tax will raise the price of food and that will starve children, just as assuredly as sanctions against Iraq starved.
Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.
From a 60 minutes interview.
Do you think the price is worth it Ken? Do you think starving children to death is worth protecting a fraud so that Democrats and lefties the world over can go to sleep feeling good about their environmental religion?
You and everyone like you makes me feel physically ill Ken. You're not scientists. You're not seekers of the truth. You're just the other side of the face of death.
Every scientist that gets a goverment handout and it`s about to run out will say anything to get back on the goverment tit.
He cares not for the world, just his ass
Keep going denialists. Keep it up.
Keep finding all those altered files. Show them to the world. Show the worrrrrrrld how they did it. Publicize them all.
What's that?
What's that you say?
You haven't found a single altered file yet?
Oh, golly gee!
Well, gosh! Keep looking! The truth is out there! Scully!
Best,
D
Keep drinking your cool-ade Dano and Ken. The e-mails have been validated by the writers. Why the political correctness on your part. This is what it is... a huge scandal! Nothing said by Phil Jones, Michael Mann, Mick Kelly, or any of the rest of the anti-science scientists at Britain's Climate Research Unit can ever be believed again! This is a scandal unlike anything the world has ever seen. The evidence doesn't back up their theory, so hide the evidence? Do any of you know that we are living in one of only two periods in the last 600 million years that have both CO2 and Temperatures this low? Didn't think so... Guess what followed the last one... an ice age. This goes right along with the admission from the outgoing Greenpeace head, Gerd Leipold, that Greenpeace had lied about the Arctic ice melting by 2030. Even the founder of Greenpeace-Canada is an AGW non-believer.
to daveC good for u.. sadly both parties are corrupt its like having to prize fighters going at it in the ring but both have the same promoter.. so whats the point of watching u know the fight is rigged..the sceince has been influenced by politics by the very begining did u really think it would be 100% truthful..politicians lie all the time espeacially when there is money(LOTS) involved..and i loved al gore talk about the poor polar bear that can't swim even know they are known as some of the best land animal swimmers on the planet..if global warming was such a serious problem why try profit off it like some these big global banks (jp morgan /nm rothschild)and certain individuals..so we reduce our standard of living, but as we pay the carbon tax to these people they get richer and we get poorer..correct me if im wrong that sounds like how a scam works to me..
Yes, Gene.
The scientists had power over nature and made the globe warm, glaciers retreat, animals and plants move north, sea level rise. Why, it was a vast conspiracy.
Certainly nature is reversing itself as we speak, no? Freed from the green lobby's powah!!! Free at last!
Why, I bet we can see nature reversing itself today.
*looks out window, returns to computer*
He-- yeah! Birds are moving south and animals are moving downhill right now! Is there a story in the em-ess-em?! He-- NO! The em-ess-em is in on it too! F---ers. It's up to you, Gene, to spread the true truth.
Keep talking Gene.
Best,
D
There are hundreds of thousands of scientific articles written by over ten thousand authors in several dozen specialties. I have read many of them myself, and looked at several hundred pictures. YOU GUYS are part of the confusion perfusion of the media (ladies of the night) paid to write about something you know nothing about. By business interests who have something (big bucks) to loose by acknowledging the truth. Shame!
Dr. Bond, yes, let's blame big business - it is all their fault and the money involved. Oh wait! Before we do that, let's take a quick gander at how much money the good Dr. Phil Jones has received for his research. Right in the neighborhood of 22 million pounds in the last ten years in the form of grants from green interests. There is money on both sides so that is really irrelevant. The story isn't about whether or not there is climate change or global warming - it is about the conduct of those producing the science.
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!