Tag: Climategate

Climategate: Sensitive Documents Lifted from Hadley Climate Center

By Keith Johnson, Wall Street Journal

Well, this should get interesting. The Hadley Climate Research Unit in Britain was hacked yesterday, apparently by Russian black hats, and thousands of sensitive documents, including emails from climate scientists dating back a decade, were posted online. More here. Officials at Hadley, a leading global-warming research center, have apparently confirmed to an Australian a Kiwi publication that the documents are genuine. The whole affair has much of the blogosphere alight. Blogs skeptical of man-made global warming see blood in the water. Some of the old emails from scientists made public apparently make references to things like “hid[ing] the decline,” referring to global temperature series and different ways to slice and dice climate data. In all, it seems there are more than 3,000 files in the hacked folders, which have been reposted in various places on the Internet. The big Copenhagen summit had lost a lot of its appeal in recent days, as world leaders kept dialing down expectations for the climate talks. Maybe this will spice things up.Source

CRU hacking reveals global warming alarmists true nature

By Kristin McMurray
A hacker broke into the computer at the University of East Angila’s Climate Research Unit (Hadley CRU) and published over a thousand confidential emails on the internet. (Hat tip: Telegraph UK and Watts Up With That). Some of the contents include:

  • Manipulation of scientific evidence
  • Doubts about global warming
  • Suppression of evidence
  • Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Skeptic scientists
  • Tactics on how to remove dissenting scientists from the peer review process

Couple of the star examples taken from the Telegraph UK article:

Manipulation of evidence:

I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.

Suppression of evidence:

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.

Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Skeptic scientists

Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat
the crap out of him. Very tempted.

Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:

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.

Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP): ……Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back…

Source

BREAKING: Hadley CRU has apparently been hacked – hundreds of files released

Watch out, Al Gore. Run for the hills, Obama. Better stick your head back in the sand, Suzuki.

It is being reported that Hadley Climate Research Unit has been hacked and a ton of revealing files and personal emails have been released by the anonymous hacker. The files contain data which shows just how the alarmist “scientists” have been, and continue to, distort climate science to further their agendas.

If these turn out to be real and accurate files, it will be a massive blow to the alarmists and a major victory for all of us realists. It confirms much of what we’ve been saying all along and already know, but will likely become viral and widespread knowledge quite quickly.

Here is a sample of what was said in the emails between these scientists:
– From Phil Jones, head of the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia University, to Ray Bradley, Michael Mann, and Malcolm Hughes, three U.S. scientists who have produced the controversial “hockey-stick graphs” that purport to show rapidly increasing temperatures in recent decades. Nov, 16, 1999.

“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i. e. from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

– From Kevin Trenberth, a lead author with the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, to Michael Mann, on Oct 12. 2009. The email, titled “BBC U-turn on climate,” laments a BBC article that reversed its long-held position on man-made global warming.

“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. … Our observing system is inadequate.”

– From: Michael Mann, Oct 27, 2009

“Perhaps we’ll do a simple update to the Yamal post… As we all know, this isn’t about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.”

– From: Edward Cook, June 4, 2003

“I got a paper to review (submitted to the Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Sciences), written by a Korean guy and someone from Berkeley, that claims that the method of reconstruction that we use in dendroclimatology (reverse regression) is wrong, biased, lousy, horrible, etc. … If published as is, this paper could really do some damage … It won’t be easy to dismiss out of hand as the math appears to be correct theoretically (…) I am really sorry but I have to nag about that review — Confidentially I now need a hard and if required extensive case for rejecting.”

– From: Tom Wigley, Sep 27, 2009

“So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 C, then this would be significant for the global mean — but we’d still have to explain the land blip. I’ve chosen 0.15 here deliberately. This still leaves an ocean blip, and i think one needs to have some form of ocean blip to explain the land blip (via either some common forcing, or ocean forcing land, or vice versa, or all of these).”

– From: Phil Jones, Feb 2, 2005

“The two MMs [Canadian skeptics Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick] have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone.”

Stay tuned.

FOLLOW THIS DEVELOPING STORY AT WattsUpWithThat.com and ClimateDepot.com and of course right here at ILoveCarbonDioxide.com!