Gore Lied has a good chronology of how it all started, Genesis of a Hack/Leak The Air Vent, where the files first appeared, finds Collusion, Corruption, Manipulation and Obstruction, and that’s just for starters. The Examiner follows the idea that the CRU data and email release was not a hack, but a leak. Toldya. Dr. Tim Ball (more of him below) sees the leak as the death blow to climate science. Heh. One climate scientist thinks the leak is appalling. Not because what was said between the CRU wiseguys is wrong, but because the emails were cherry-picked. Maybe Briffa leaked them? Powerline takes a look at the less than purist scientific method of the motley CRU. In climate science, the results are fitted to the agenda. What the leak/hack has done is simple but devastating, it has destroyed the IPCC’s credibility. As polls around the world show the public suffering from green fatigue, you can guarantee that some politicians will use the scandal to delay and eventually back away from what will soon be a toxic mess.
The Inconvenient Emails/Data
It didn’t take long for the enterprising blogger at An Elegant Chaos to compile the data into a searchable form. Go there and see what you can find, there’s still lots to go through. Andrew Bolt, an inconvenient Aussie, details some of the more egregious emails and finds so-called leading scientific minds colluding to ruin the careers of those that disagree:
I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor… It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !
That pesky hockey stick, and its author, Michael Mann, are at the center of the CRU hack/leak.
Bishop Hill has a great summary of some of the emails, revealing a thread of censorship and bunker mentality protectionism among the world’s leading climate ’scientists’. Watergate led to shredding parties, but for the motley CRU pressing ‘DEL’ to conceal the ugly truth behind their corrupt science was easier. Why the leak matters, from a Brit devil. Alan Caruba has a lot to say about what the leaked data tells us about the scientists and the science behind the great global warming hoax. The scientists charlatans revealed by the Hadley CRU leak prefer to focus on the legality of the data’s release, but in the end, it might be themselves on the wrong side of the law. Misleading governments, denying fair FOIA requests and deleting data are all serious no-no’s and the actions have consequences. Even believers are having a hard time swallowing the science now the deception is revealed. While early analysis and headlines have been based on the emails leaked, it may be that more damaging evidence lies in the code that was leaked. Slimate scaremongers have a long record of discounting skeptical research from any scientist that received so much as a free mug with a tank of gas. How inconvenient then that we can see exactly how much money the motley CRU received from Big Green.
The Hadley CRU Hack/Leak in the Media
Of all the cable news folks, guess who was the only channel running with the story? Hint: It’s not owned by GE. Andrew revkin, the NYT’s paid global warming shill was inconveniently outed in the leak as being an insider, getting exclusive access from Mann, Jones etc. Although they called him ‘unpredictable Andy’, he did his best to cover for his friends. More Andrew Bolt on the CRU emails in the media. Dr. Tim Ball, all around smart dude and skeptic, has a few things to say about the ‘battery of machine guns’ revelations from the Hadley hack:
.. The UK’s Daily Mail was one of the first mainstream papers to pick up the story, and you can be certain that some lefties swooned when they read ‘the global warming con’ headline. The Telegraph’s tame skeptic James Delingpole reviews the first few days of coverage (or non-coverage) in the media. The WSJ covers the leak, but not much of the content. Science, what science? The LA Times, at the bleeding edge of the legacy media’s headlong rush to irrelevance, moves the goalposts to avoid dealing with the CRU fallout. Australian papers run with the story. Or do they? The Mail notes how the scientists at the CRU continually blocked skeptics FOIA requests and has a nice little profile of Phil Jones:
American Thinker has excellent analysis of the ‘fraud’ committed in the name of selling junkscience. The Telegraph headlines with ‘Climate scientists accused of ‘manipulating global warming data’. Ouch.
Scaremonger George Marshall has a conniption in The Guardian about the leaks and how the East Anglia University blew the PR spin of the CRU leak/hack. Also, whilst calling skeptics conspiracy nuts, he goes on to say:
I suspect it goes further than that. The storyline is too clever, the timing on the brink of Copenhagen and the US climate bill too convenient. I wait with interest to find out how these emails were obtained.
You couldn’t make it up.
DeSmogBlog focuses on the ‘hack’ and ignores the inconvenient truths revealed about climate ’scientist’s’ thuggery, collusion and data manipulation. I give it a week before we find out that it was more leak than hack, which means that the desmoggers will have to come up with a whole new spin cycle. Heh. Dyed-in-the-wool hippie FriedGreen goes all street and wants to hit back, hard. So much for peace and love, brother. Joltin Joe reacted badly, then decided to remind his followers that Gaia is still doomed. Poor Joe still thinks that ’science’ is credible and that the world will forget about the Hadley CRU. They won’t, and that turns his universe upside down and makes him the denier. RealClimate laughs in the face of disaster, bragging that there is no proof of a conspiracy:
There is no evidence of any worldwide conspiracy, no mention of George Soros nefariously funding climate research, no grand plan to ‘get rid of the MWP’, no admission that global warming is a hoax, no evidence of the falsifying of data, and no ‘marching orders’ from our socialist/communist/vegetarian overlords
then they too go on to wonder about… a conspiracy:
The timing of this particular episode is probably not coincidental.
CRU Hack/Leak Hottie
I can’t abandon round up tradition, so here is a hottie. Astute readers will know that she once played a hacker in, err, Hackers. Skeptics, give a warm Monday welcome to Mrs. Pitt, Angelie Jolie.
If you see any stories not featured here, feel free to add them in the comments. Thanks for reading.Source