arrest the crimatologists
Posts tagged cru
Founder of CRU Predicted Global Cooling for 200 years
May 4th
via Bishop Hill Blog
April 26, 2010
More from the archives: this is a clipping from the Deseret News of Salt Lake City – the edition of 8th September 1972. It carries details of an interview with Hubert Lamb, the founder of the Climatic Research Unit, in which the great man discusses the impending ice age.
This is interesting because I seem to remember William Connolley writing a paper that said that fears of an impending ice age were largely confined to the press. I guess this is only a newspaper story, but if reputable scientists were spinning baseless scare stories then the poor hacks can hardly be blamed for reporting what was said.
I wonder if this kind of thing is the modus operandi among CRU scientists…
The Guardian hounds CRU with new reports
Feb 5th
Watts Up With That?
February 6 2010
A series of events appears to be unfolding in the UK that provide for a serial story. As they say in the news biz “it has legs”.
Two more stories have emerged from the Guardian by Fred Pearce. They read like Climate Audit narratives rather than Guardian stories we’ve come to know in the past. In fact, Climate Audit is heavily cited, a first that I can recall.
Here are the two headlines:
click image for the source storyand this one….
click image for the source storyThe Guardian is keeping up the pressure on UEA/CRU and Dr. Jones. It’s almost like a “death spiral” to borrow a phrase from Dr. Mark Serreze of NSIDC.
I would not be surprised if resignations are being considered.
h/t to Dr. Richard North of the EU Referendum for links
UPDATE: It appears that the Guardian reporter has tipped his hand. WUWT commenter “dodgy geezer” writes:
…note this comment from the Guardian, explaining why they seem to be addressing the skeptical line for the first time. It seems they are building the story into a big ‘disproof’ of the skeptical position. Find it at:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Question – What is the purpose for publishing all these articles by Fred Pearce?
Many thanks for your comments and questions. The fall-out from the hacked UEA emails is the hottest story in climate science at the moment and a lot of claims about what they tell us have been flying around since they were made public in November.
The Guardian’s editorial line is that global warming is happening and caused by human actions, but that does not mean we are blind to contradictory evidence. It would be remiss of us journalistically to ignore a story like this where the actions of leading scientists are being seriously called into question.
We asked Fred to do a thorough investigation into some of the unanswered questions.
Is there evidence in the emails of data manipulation? Is there evidence of abuse of peer review and FOI? Is there evidence of “hiding” temperature declines? Is there evidence of fraud and conspiracy? etc etc
The answer to most of these questions turned out to be no. But it would be wrong of us not to have asked them. The aim of this investigation (which continues tomorrow) was to produce a more nuanced account of what went on behind the scenes of climate science than has appeared elsewhere. Some of it is not pretty, but significantly, the science of global warming has not been seriously challenged.
J Randerson
………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
It may be that Jones will be made the sacrifice for the FoI transgressions, so that they can get the bus back on the road.
Chinese weather station-gate
Feb 4th
YouTube – UK uni, no apology for fiddled climate data (02Feb10).
Watch for the plug at 2:07. Hat tip to WACHolland.org
Crimatologists Found Guilty of Hiding Data
Jan 29th
James Corbett
The Corbett Report
29 January, 2010
It’s just not the IPCC’s month. Now, on top of Pachaurigate and Glaciergate, the original Climategate scandal has finally exploded underneath the crimatologists at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. In a shocking rebuke of the key scientsts behind the IPCC ‘peer-reviewed’ assessment of the dangers of manmade climate change, the UK Information Commissioner ruled yesterday that the group of scientists known as ‘the hockey team’ had broken Freedom of Information laws by conspiring to ignore legitimate requests for information and even conspiring to delete key emails and correspondence so they could never be assessed.
The decision comes as no surprise to those who have been following the scandal since it broke. Given that the authenticity of the leaked emails themselves has never been in doubt, it was an open and shut case to find criminal conspiracy in emails such as this one from chief crimatologist Phil Jones to some of his closest collaborators:
| Mike, 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. I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!! Cheers |
Or this one from Phil Jones to chief cohort Michael Mann in 2005 about Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, two researchers who had a well-known problem getting basic data out of the CRU:
| The two MMs 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. Does your similar act in the US force you to respond to enquiries within 20 days? – our does [sic]! The UK works on precedents, so the first request will test it. We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind. |
The illegal activity will not be pursued criminally, however, because of a statute of limitations on Freedom of Information request violations. Although a mere technicality, this does raise the rather Kafkaesque question of how the afflicted parties were supposed to have shown grounds for appeal of the hockey team’s initial denials (let alone criminal activity in conspiring to deny the requests) before the Climategate emails were leaked. Give the pre-Climategate mentality—where those who suspected criminal conspiracy amongst the crimatologists were often compared to flat-earthers, it is almost inconceivable that complaints to the Information Commissioner would have been given serious consideration, especially given the crimatologists’ own admissions that they had gotten advice from none other than the Information Commissioner on how to avoid dealing with FOI requests.
But while this ruling will not result in criminal conviction, it certainly will further expose the alarmist machine that has been working desperately to downplay this criminal activity. Scientific American (henceforth known as SCAM) has just released an article claiming that the Climategate emails exposed nothing other than “how science is actually done,” putting the venerable publication in the awkward position of arguing that breaking the law in a mad quest to keep data out of the hands of dissenting scientists is a routine part of the scientific method. Sadly, such reasoning is par for the course in publications that have thrown their lot in with a group of criminals who are threatening the name of science itself with their insane behaviour.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
 |
Perhaps the most hopeful sign to emerge from this is that the truth will out, especially when an informed online community does an end run around the dinosaurs of the establishment media to get that truth to the people. All of the publications one would have expected to defend the indefensible did so right from the start of the Climategate scandal, from the BBC to The Guardian to The New York Times to Nature. Now, each of them have egg on their faces as the scandal they dismissed as a “tempest in a teapot” is in fact evidence of criminal activity…as the alternative media has pointed out all along.
Scandals like this are exactly why the establishment media is hemorrhaging readers and viewers by the day while the alternative online media is exploding across the board. From Watts Up With That? to Climate Audit to to Climategate.tv, readership has never been better. The people recognize the truth when they see it, and those who continue to propound lies in the face of truth and defend the indefensible will be turned off by a public that is simply fed up. And that, ultimately, is why the truth is winning.
Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data
Jan 28th
Times Online
January 28, 2010
The university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny.
The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming.
The Information Commissioner’s Office decided that UEA failed in its duties under the Act but said that it could not prosecute those involved because the complaint was made too late, The Times has learnt. The ICO is now seeking to change the law to allow prosecutions if a complaint is made more than six months after a breach.
The stolen e-mails , revealed on the eve of the Copenhagen summit, showed how the university’s Climatic Research Unit attempted to thwart requests for scientific data and other information, and suggest that senior figures at the university were involved in decisions to refuse the requests. It is not known who stole the e-mails.
Most recent comments