Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Scientists Hiding Evidence of Global Cooling

Recently some hackers obtained 160 megabytes of email from scientists working for the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England. These emails contain evidence of climate scientists attempting to hide or skew data that would prove damaging to global warming theorists. You can read an editorial in regard to this in the Washington Times here.
There is a lot of damning evidence about these researchers concealing information that counters their bias. In another exchange, Mr. Jones told Mr. Mann: "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" and, "We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind." Mr. Jones further urged Mr. Mann to join him in deleting e-mail exchanges about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) controversial assessment report (ARA): "Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re [the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report]?"

In another e-mail, Mr. Jones told Mr. Mann, professor Malcolm K. Hughes of the University of Arizona and professor Raymond S. Bradley of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst: "I'm getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don't any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!"

At one point, Mr. Jones complained to another academic, "I did get an email from the [Freedom of Information] person here early yesterday to tell me I shouldn't be deleting emails." He also offered up more dubious tricks of his trade, specifically that "IPCC is an international organization, so is above any national FOI. Even if UEA holds anything about IPCC, we are not obliged to pass it on." Another professor at the Climate Research Unit, Tim Osborn, discussed in e-mails how truncating a data series can hide a cooling trend that otherwise would be seen in the results. Mr. Mann sent Mr. Osborn an e-mail saying that the results he was sending shouldn't be shown to others because the data support critics of global warming.

9 comments:

Christopher Furlong: said...

I see you are now supporting thieves and quoter who quote out of contexts. That's high quality bullshit right there, Josh!

Josh said...

I don't support hackers, however let me play devil's advocate.

What was stolen from whom?

Christopher Furlong: said...

People's private information, duh.

Also, you didn't answer my second critique. OUT OF CONTEXT. SELECTED EMAILS.

Pretty fucking pathetic if you ask me...

Josh said...

Its obviously out-of-context. Take it for what it is and make your own judgement.

Which people own the information?

Christopher Furlong: said...

The university and the authors..

Christopher Furlong: said...

Again, I think that cherry-picking from a huge volume of emails is at best irrelevant, at worst immoral.

Josh said...

Public research institution. The emails weren't "stolen".

Christopher Furlong: said...

"Public research institution. The emails weren't "stolen"."

They were taken from the university without permission, and hence stolen. Why didn't they just asked for permission? Oh fucking yeah, because the emails are not public, because the professors that wrote them own them.

Christopher Furlong: said...

Cherry picking from thousands of emails is fucking pathetic.