This is for British citizens and expats only. Since George Monbiot called for Dr. Jones to resign, and for the data to be reanalysed, perhaps some UK readers can persuade him to sign.
Here are the details:
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to suspend the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia from preparation of any Government Climate Statistics until the various allegations have been fully investigated by an independent body.
Deadline to sign up by: 24 February 2010
The details of the petition:
The Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia is a “leading centre” for the investigation of “manmade global warming” and government policy relies on the integrity of these statistics. Several claims have been made: that data was “cherry picked” to make the 20th century temperature rise look exceptional in historical terms; emails suggest the unit has colluded in “tricks” to “hide the decline” in a high profile scientific journal, and this unit has colluded in active, secret and highly political campaigning through the website “realclimate”.
The preparation of climate statistics require many judgements: stations move & sites become surrounded by urban sprawl (urban heating) & a judgement must be made of the size of the offset to apply to the global temperature record. The University accepts most emails are genuine so it appears the Unit has been acting in a highly partisan way incompatible with that of a neutral body preparing and interpreting government data. We call on the PM to suspend all further use of the climate research unit until all pertinent allegations have been investigated and any action (if any) has been taken.
If you are a UK citizen, expat, or resident, here is where you can add your name to the petition.
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/UEACRU/
Tough I speak from Seattle, I say, “Hear, hear!”
Climate Audit is still nearly impossible to access.
Is it still just high traffic or is the site experiencing a denial of service attack?
Any info? (Don’t speculate–I can do that all by myself.)
Watch the money dry up. I suspect the guildt by association will have a wide reach.
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/Pope_L.pdf
They cry “taken out of context”
Here is what it is like if Jones and Mann discuss a paper from someone they don’t like.
Any info? (Don’t speculate–I can do that all by myself.)
http://camirror.wordpress.com/
Actually it’s the “Climatic Research Unit”. Not a good start – but not a good name.
Done…
Nice idea, I just signed. Unfortunately some an*l retentive has put a disparaging message instead of a name as the first entry – how can we get it removed ?
When are you going to eliminate the pro-warming Google Ads. These are making this site look really stupid.
REPLY: Well look at it this way, WUWT is advertising supported. – Anthony
“It’s Worse Than We Thought” — latest installment from the Team:
http://www.copenhagendiagnosis.com/
I had already set one up but let’s run with this one
Has anyone yet done a “flow chart” that shows the incestuous relationships that are shared amongst these charlatans in their relationship to each other and the “peer review” papers etc. ?
The government will ignore that petition. They have too much tied up in global warming (climate change) to give up now.
Just added my name, thanks. But still waiting for these people – http://www.cafepress.com.au/hidethedecline – to get back to me when they have the t-shirts available from their UK shop.
Thanks, Obama! You have wisdom!
God protect and bless WUWT and climateaudit! You will need…
Joe!
Just signed. And as a first time commentator, I just have to say, fantastic work Anthony!
This is slightly off topic (though as a UK citizen I am signing the petition) but I can’t think where else to get it off my chest (though I may cross post on the Guardian and Telegraph). I looked at the CRU website, and specifically the staff list. Discounting research students, support staff and individuals whose email implies they are primarily affiliated elsewhere, they have 19 staff on climate research. 19! And some of them are listing their primary interest as ‘social and economic consequences’. So one of the four primary contributors to the science that is intended to justify the bet on what happens in the future which affects *everyone* is based on the work of 19 people! For expletive’s sake! How many people are working on the LHC? How many people are supporting the space shuttle? How can anyone in their right mind say that the work of 19 people is enough. Even if it is 4 x 19!
Is it me or is it the website, everytime I go back to the page the number of signatories is the same and my name is not amongst them even though I confirmed?
Signed.
Signed, of course. Don’t hesitate, pile in there!
Years ago it was always said that pettions were used by politicians to light their pipes.
I don’t think that many politicans smoke pipes nowdays. And I’m not confident that they will take much notice either. But, if we keep up pressure they will have to start taking notice and maybe even wondering what the hell the UEA ‘team’ have been up to.
In the mean time, if they want any suggestions where they can stick OUR petition, I can offer a good one. And then they can set fire to it.
TGSG;
You need to look at the Wegman Report, I don’t have a source ( I got a copy from Steven Milloy’s ‘Junk Science’ site) but it details the cliquish nature of peer review and problematic nature of independence oin Climate Science in the US. Good starting point. I believe it was driven by a request from Senator Inhofe.
Wegman report (I think it was) has one …
Link anyone?
.
.
Fudging the numbers the old fashioned way,
It leaves out Gavin Schmidt and his Boss james Hansen.
My name is now added to that list. It’s good to see the illustrious company I’m in – Christopher Monkton is just a few names above my own (Lynne Lancaster). 😀
Whoever the CRUgate deep throat is, we owe him (or her) a shed-load of thanks.
Done and done. Cheeers!
AQ42, 14:44:55
A staff of 19 to keep a set of monthly temp data up to scratch? It’s the sort of job that a sales secretary would be expected to do for the Director first week of every month, and to have it accurate and timely too. The real question is why it takes 13 million quid to do it, especially given that they don’t seem to have a decent programmer to chuck the numbers into a decent database.