ClimateGate 2: “Climate Scientists” defend work in wake of new leak of hacked emails

Latest leak appears to be attempt to undermine public support for international climate change action ahead of Durban talks.

Climate scientists have mounted a robust defence of their work and debates over science after more than 5,000 personal emails were leaked onto the internet in an apparent attempt to undermine public support for international action to tackle climate change.

More than 39,000 pages of emails to and from scientists at the University of East Anglia (UEA) were loaded onto a Russian server and a link to them posted on climate sceptic websites on Tuesday, almost exactly two years after a similar release of hacked or leaked emails in the run-up to the Copenhagen climate talks in 2009.

Norfolk police have also responded to criticism that their invesitgation into who released the 2009 emails had yet to make any arrests. A spokesperson described it as an unusual and complex case, adding that the inquiry had “been determined and persistent in following all relevant lines of enquiry”, including the latest email dump.

A selection of hand-picked quotes from the emails appeared to support the criticisms which followed the first batch of emails – that the scientists were too secretive about their data; sometimes destroying evidence to avoid it being scrutinised; were politically motivated; and were selectively choosing models and statistics to support the proposition that the global climate has warmed over the last century as a result of greenhouse gas emissions caused by humans.

But when read as part of the full email in which they appear, the quotes read very differently, the scientists counter.

One email from Professor Phil Jones, now research director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at UEA, for example, appears at first glance to cast doubt on the whole cornerstone of climate science. He wrote that “all models are wrong”. However, he explained he was referring not to all climate models, but to new models attempting to average existing ones, which Jones believed were not complex enough.

In another email discussing graphs of past temperature measurements Jones says “we’re choosing the periods to show warming”. This, Jones told a briefing at the Science Media Centre in London, was because the graphs needed to show what the data demonstrated, that there was a warming trend in both sets, from 1901-2005 and 1970-2005: “Those periods show warming. They were not pre-selected to show warming,” he said.

Following the 2009 emails, the university set up an inquiry led by Sir Alastair Muir Russell, which concluded last year that the university had not been open enough in answering requests under the Freedom of Information Act, but backed the scientists’ published work on climate change and said there was no evidence they were deliberately keeping information out of the IPCC reports or journals.

Read More : The Guardian

Climategate 2.0: the Warmists’ seven stages of grief

Climategate 2.0 – the gift that goes on giving. And you know how good it is from the reaction of the trolls. They’re going mental.

On the one hand they’d like to insist it’s a non-story. On the other hand, the more shrilly they shriek it’s a non-story the more evident it becomes just what a great story it is.

Here’s an amusing analysis of the warmist trolls’ various lines of defence, which I picked up from the comments at Watts Up With That: (H/T Alix James – and a big thanks to all those of you who helped me find him)
Stage 1: they aren’t real emails
Stage 2: they are real emails but they aren’t in context
Stage 3: they are in context, but that’s how scientists work
Stage 4: ok, this isn’t really science, but you guys stole the…

Read More: Telegraph


CLIMATE sceptics demanded a full public inquiry yesterday amid claims that a new set of leaked e-mails appeared to cast doubt on man-made global warming.

The 5,000 excerpts of hacked e-mails – already dubbed Climategate 2 – contain discussions of deleting emails in the face of freedom of information requests, models being “wrong”, references to climate change as “the cause” and critical comments on research and researchers.

The data has been released anonymously on a Russian server  days before crucial international talks in Durban on fighting man-made climate change.

Read More :


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: