Climategate Round-Up #2

The CRU hack/leak story is moving fast, and it’s tough to keep up, but fear not, for another bonus round-up is here to help.

Did the BBC hide the story for a month? Did Phil Jones know he’d be compared to a famous but unpleasant Presidential emission? You’ll be surprised what you can learn. Oh, and I turned up the snark-o-matic, enjoy.

The Leak/Hack

BBC weatherman Paul Hudson confirms the leaked emails are genuine. He knows this because they were emailed to him in October. The obvious questions are, who emailed it to him, and why did Hudson not think evidence of corruption and collusion worthy of reporting?

Was it a hack, or a leak? Maybe it was neither.

Lord Lawson, Thatcherite ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer, demands a public enquiry into the exposed malpractice and deception of the motley CRU.

Sen. Inhofe makes me look like a genius and demands an investigation. Thanks, Jim.

Pile on! The CEI sues NASA/GISS for ignoring FOIA requests. For any lefties reading, this is a face palm moment. Go ahead, we’ll wait.

not the WWF again

not the WWF again

If it was a leak, whodunnit?
Malkin notes that enquiries are being demanded on both sides of the Atlantic. Popcorn, bring me it.

It’s the fraud, stupid.

The Inconvenient Emails/Data

Revenge of the nerds: a programmer trawls through the leaked CRU code and giggles mightily at what he finds. Settled science, what science? James Taranto on the revelations of corruption.

Revenge of the nerds part deux: a statistician digs into the code, and is unimpressed.

Viscount Monkton reviewed the data and emails and determines that the motley CRU are criminals. Ouch, don’t sugar coat it or anything.

The CRU leak undermines scientist’s credibility and the IPCC’s ability to push junk science at a very bad time for the alarmists as they pack their bags for Hopenchangen in Copenhagen.
The motley CRU made ASSes of themselves.
Freakonomicist Dubner see the ugly side of science.
Warmist believers cannot believe what they are finding out about the people they trusted were selling them, and boy, are they upset.

Do Jones et al’s repeated statements about denying FOI requests mean that the data set wasn’t lost, but deleted?

The CRU Hack/Leak in the Media

The Australian covers the bunfight between alarmists and skeptics, giving fair weight to the inconvenient truths exposed in the CRU leak.
Planet Gore compares the CRU leak to Clintonesque spooge on a blue dress. Apologies for the imagery, but they said it.

The Washington Post weighs in and picks on Jones and Mann.
The Chicago Observer wants an apology from the warmistas. Perhaps when hell freezes over. And it might, apparently climate models aren’t all that great.

The Daily Telegraph asks readers what they think of the leak, with predictable results.
The fix is in. You don’t say?

The Washington Times: Hiding evidence of global cooling, Junk science exposed among climate-change believers

The WSJ piles on. And then reports on the lawmakers waking up to the scandal.

Hippie Heads Exploding

The New York Times released information that compromised US national security, but won’t publish the CRU documents. Agenda, much?

The Guardian’s George Monbiot apologizes for being a credulon* but then tries to gloss over the seriousness of the CRU leak by writing a (bad) satirical piece. I warned you, remember that.

can you tell he's a leftie?

he’s a leftie, does it show?

The University of East Anglia, site of the CRU, issues a reaction to the hack/leak that will look pretty silly if it turns out not to be a hack. Shamefully, they have no condemnation of the scientific malpractice, bullying and deception committed by their team, just words about how hackers are bad.

It’s a good thing hippies are allergic to soap, because somebody needs to go to jail. And he doesn’t mean the hacker.

Unpredictable Andy Revkin hosts a debate about whether the leak is more serious than what it uncovered. Right now, alarmists cling to the hope that the release of the data was a hack, because if it was a leak, their primary defense will disappear faster than President Obama when a tough decision is needed.

Phil Jones, CRU leader, wonders if his age is a problem understanding the cooling trend. Cluebat for Phil, it’s not your age that’s deficient, it’s your ethics.
Believers explain their point of view about the inconvenient truth: shut up!

*Credulon = A Credulous Moron ( or AGW believer)

Because it’s just not a round-up without a hottie. Continuing the hacker theme from yesterday, Sneakers starred Robert Redford. Redford co-starred in Spy Games with Brad Pitt, whose current Mrs. was yesterday’s hottie. So here’s his ex, Jennifer Aniston. You’re welcome.
Thanks for reading.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *