Quote of the week #23 – calls for resignation in Climategate

Calls from the left for the resignation of Dr. Phil Jones from CRU continue to mount, and they are coming from surprising places.

qotw_cropped

For the second time this week, George Monbiot called for the resignation of Dr. Jones saying:

But there is no helping it; he has to go, and the longer he leaves it, the worse it will get. He has a few days left in which to make an honourable exit.

I don’t know that an honourable exit is possible at all now, given the revelations of FOIA obstruction. Read Monbiot’s column in the Guardian here. But, if Dr. Jones does decide to resign, or the University asks him to do so, I expect this coming Monday will be his last opportunity to do so per Monbiot’s suggestion.

Maybe as on object lesson for himself in all this, Mr. Monbiot can learn to stop calling people he disagrees with “deniers”. The connotations with “holocaust denier” are distasteful and unnecessary.

Ditto for Richard Littlemore of DeSmog Blog, who could also dispense with the term in language he uses if he wants to bridge the gap. He also, by the way, suggested Dr. Jones resignation saying:

I don’t personally know that Jones has to be sacked, but I have to admit that it would be savvy for him to at least offer to step aside before someone in authority makes a move to give him a push.

As 25 year veteran member of the media myself, and still currently employed in radio, I agree with Mr. Monbiot when he says:

The crisis has been exacerbated by the university’s handling of it, which has been a total trainwreck: a textbook example of how not to respond.

I expect more calls for resignation will follow. Plus, we’ll see investigations being launched.

Trainwreck might not be a descriptive enough word.

About these ads

158 thoughts on “Quote of the week #23 – calls for resignation in Climategate

  1. In first line should be Phil Jones?

    I guess it’s just a merging of Michael mann with Phil Jones, Hey maybe they could both go?

  2. I am concerned that Phil Jones will be the scapegoat when in fact the whole AGW industry is at fault.

    Dr. Jones will be blamed and hung out to dry but the AGW machine could keep grinding on.

  3. I imagine there are some faithful readers out there who have been away for the last week, have just arrived home, fire up the computer, check their Email, then come here and find the universe was swapped out while they were away.

  4. Ric Werme (19:48:44) :

    “universe was swapped out …”

    Best description I have seen – Ric did it in only 4 words!

  5. Despite Monbiot’s calls for Dr Jones to resign, Monbiot continues with terms like “rationalist”, when describing his position, “denier” in describing skeptics. The verbiage he uses tells all. Being a rationalist implies that being a denier is something to look on with contempt, or even pity.

    His point of view is skewed as the very ideals of science he espouses are the ones that the deceit, the lack of openness required to replicate results; and the very messy debates that must occur for science to be..well, science, are sorely lacking. The CRUgate emails reveal that very clearly.

    I see nothing in his remarks that lead me to believe that anything but a very bitter fight is in his – and our – future.

  6. The Sacrificial Offering.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, Deniers all! for your turning the other cheek after we called you names and accused you of all the things we actually did ourselves we humbly offer you Phil Jones as payment.

    We give him to you as a symbol of our contrition, now back to business as usual, we have a Climate Conference to prepare graphs for.

    This is nothing but misdirection and hoping that a sudden case of conscience can absolve them of guilt as easily as an offset negates their carbon sins. It is a offer to make us all go away.

    I do not understand the motive though they have so much political cover on this and a complicit MSM that the only thing I can think of is that they stopped emailing the talking points around since this incident occurred and Monboit and DeSmog have headed off the reservation.

  7. It seems just and proper that Mr. Jones should resign from his post. He has been dishonest, possibly even committed crimes. It won’t look good if he still has his UEA title when sitting at the defendant’s table.

    It seems equally just and proper that the respective institutions should investigate the conduct of their respective employees. A full purge is truly needed to cut out this rot.

  8. I am not yet convinced that there has been a serious (note modifier) scandal of science here. Tho I leave open the possibility that once the data portions of the leak have been analyzed that I may eventually come to that conclusion.

    I am convinced, and have been since day one, that there has indeed been a serious scandal of *scientists* here, centered around Dr. Jones.

    Dr. Jones must go as head of CRU. He can remain as a professor, researcher, teacher, and person who attempts to publish his findings. He must not remain as someone with high administrative and coordinating power. He has clearly shown he is not worthy of it.

    Dr. Jones says “My colleagues and I accept that some of the published emails do not read well.” That’s mighty big of you, Phil. Mighty big. Except YOU were in a position of leadership. If you had lead by example in a different direction those emails likely would have “read well”, or at least better, not only yours but your colleagues and underlings. That’s what leadership does –it sets a tone, a culture, that the rest of ones peers and underlings then tend to follow. If those emails “don’t read well”, then Phil Jones, director of one of the, oh, 3-5?, most important climate research institutions in the world, has nowhere to look for the reason why but in the mirror.

  9. Anthony, I absolutely applaud your coverage of this. Nobel prize material.

    Instead of resignation, the CRU shouold be called upon to go back to the baseline data, reconstruct their predictions (if they can), and make it available and transparent to all.

    This is a far harder path for them then their resignation. It is also professionally correct.

    John Ryer, PE, CPG, CCM

    PS. Thank you for the earlier Akasofu article, he is a friend from Fairbanks. By the way, we all voted for global warming. :)

  10. Ric Werme (19:48:44) :

    “I imagine there are some faithful readers out there who have been away for the last week, have just arrived home, fire up the computer, check their Email, then come here and find the universe was swapped out while they were away.”

    OT: During last year’s financial crisis, there was one week during which the market dropped a heart-stopping number of points–over 15% maybe–and then recovered to its starting level by Friday. One joke that circulated at the time postulated a trader returning from a one-week vacation, looking at his screen, and saying, “Seems not much happened while I was gone.”

  11. “Dr. Jones will be blamed and hung out to dry but the AGW machine could keep grinding on.”

    Don’t worry about Jones. If he gets the boot he’ll make all the money he could ever want on the extreme-left lecture circuit.

  12. Given the recent evidence of the great political minds that exist within the CRU, it is interesting to see their dismal response. Perhaps it’s simply a case of them not really thinking they’ve done anything wrong.

  13. What is it that we deny again? We have a few hundred years of suspect measurement data, and few million years of even more suspect proxy data, on a 5.4 Billion year-old planet. We don’t understand how the sun works, we don’t understand how the clouds work, we barely understand how the oceans work and volcanic activity is a complete wild card. Our understanding of Earth’s climate system is rudimentary at best. Our predictive capacity as it pertains to the trajectory and future state of Earth’s climate system borders on nil. Individuals claiming that there is a scientific consensus that humans can accurately predict the trajectory and future state of Earth’s climate system are either charlatans or deluding themselves.

  14. “Dr. Jones says “My colleagues and I accept that some of the published emails do not read well.” That’s mighty big of you, Phil. Mighty big.”

    LOL!

    chuck (20:13:44) :

    “We may be “deniers” today, but someday everyone will boast of having been in the “resistance”.”

    Right on!

  15. This is very reminiscent of the internet bubble … “there’s nothing wrong with the new business 2.0! The industry is as stable as a rock and internet businesses will continue to double and triple stock prices regardless of income! This is the new market and we don’t have to worry about downturns any longer.”

    Deny …deny … deny! Like a bad smell, it will go away.

    Not so much!!!!!!!

  16. If he goes it will because he let the information escape – not for what is contained within them.
    There is no doubt that the issue should have been handled better by the University and those responsible for the funding.
    There will still be an emphasis on the leak rather the the damage inside.

    This issue has legs and still has a way to go yet.

  17. The crisis has been exacerbated by the university’s handling of it, which has been a total trainwreck: a textbook example of how not to respond.

    Trainwreck might not be a descriptive enough word.

    Perhaps “Clusterf***” would be an appropriate qualifier.

  18. Dr. Jones is not alone. He was just one lead member of a Warmist Cabal. I hate to see anyone loose everything, even despite their calling us ‘deniers’ and ‘flat earthers’.
    If Dr. Jones has enough time at CRU, he should be allowed to retire. If not, he should be required to teach a science class covering ethics in science, the scientific method, and proper peer review methods. However, he should never be allowed touch climate data or perform peer reviews, ever. Then, when he has enough time in service, he can retire if he wants to.

  19. I’m cross-posting this from my blog because I haven’t seen it anywhere else. It’s from the hacked CRU files and concerns Shell Oil and the WTO driving the climate research agenda at CRU and ENV.

    My apologies if this information was already generally known by the community. A better-formated version of the information can be found on my web-site here: http://magicjava.blogspot.com/2009/11/setting-research-agenda.html

    ource: uea-tyndall-shell-memo.doc

    Mick Kelly and Aeree Kim (CRU, ENV) met with Robert Kleiburg (Shell International’s climate change team) on July 4th primarily to discuss access to Shell information as part of Aeree’s PhD study (our initiative) and broader collaboration through postgrad. student project placements (their initiative), but Robert was also interested in plans for the Tyndall Centre (TC). What ensued was necessarily a rather speculative discussion with the following points emerging.

    Shell International would give serious consideration to what I referred to in the meeting as a ‘strategic partnership’ with the TC, broadly equivalent to a ‘flagship alliance’ in the TC proposal. A strategic partnership would involve not only the provision of funding but some (limited but genuine) role in setting the research agenda etc.

    Shell’s interest is not in basic science. Any work they support must have a clear and immediate relevance to ‘real-world’ activities. They are particularly interested in emissions trading and CDM.[Clean Development Mechanism]

    …and…

    From: “paul horsman”
    To: m.kelly@
    Source: greenpeace.txt

    It was good to see you again yesterday – if briefly. One particular
    thing you said – and we agreed – was about the IPCC reports and
    the broader climate negotiations were working to the globalisation
    agenda driven by organisations like the WTO. So my first question
    is do you have anything written or published, or know of anything
    particularly on this subject, which talks about this in more detail?

  20. Quote of the year:

    “[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75″

  21. Re: John in NZ (19:44:14) :

    I am concerned that Phil Jones will be the scapegoat when in fact the whole AGW industry is at fault.

    Dr. Jones will be blamed and hung out to dry but the AGW machine could keep grinding on.

    One at a time, John, one at a time.

  22. Given the huge amount of comment traffic the volunteer moderators have been handling, we all should give them a nod and some applause.

  23. A modest proposal for Dr. Jones and his adherents to raise significant funds for pursuit of advocating for C02 reductions. . . .

    . . . .offer all your emails for the *last week* for download at $9.95. I would sooooo be there for that. :)

  24. Just The Facts (20:16:51) :

    Great statement, however, NOAA, claims to be able to understand from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun!!! NOT….

  25. All right everyone: how many Hockey Still Graphs will appear at Copenhagen?
    I’m taking bets…
    I heard they were moving all 12 Yamal strip bark trees to Copenhagen as well. They’ll make great furniture…

  26. Moonbat is exhibiting classic cult-deprogramming post-denial syndrome (CDPPDS to the uninformed) symptoms.

    He is profoundly disturbed that what he was led to believe is not so; he can take the Kool-Aid or demand the head of Jones.

    At least Moonbat has a sense of self-preservation, even if it goes against reducing his carbon footprint.

  27. Stay your ground Jones; fight all calls for your resignation. Make a show. You believe (not) this carp! It is what you are! Don’t be THE fall guy!

  28. Jones is not the only one that should resign, and after the rot is culled the media and governments need to be looked at next. They have committed a similar crime by not checking the data. We are supposed to rely on both parties for that….but alas right now in Australia our prime minister is reading directly from “The Copenhagen Diagnosis” in parliament today and ALL of our media is still promoting this report at every opportunity.

    Do they not realize that this is the same crew that has been lying to us all?

  29. Gary Plyler (20:28:59) :

    No, I disagree. Jones should be treated the way he treated his opponents: persecution and unemployment.

    Also, he should be locked up in jail for fraud, along with his IPCC bretheren (term used in respect of the USA thanksgiving)

  30. This thing is spreading out of control like a wildfire. The tentacles reached very far and deep. Temperature data was collected ( I presume the original hard copy) then digitized, manipultated, posted as genuine and the originals destroyed. The US looks to be badly affected. 2-3 decade chunks missing out of key stations, altered down on the back end raised up on the recent end on urban stations.
    NZ raw data appears to have escaped massive degradation.
    What a ghastly thing to do.

  31. Hey, look, if Jones goes no one should reasonbly expect that he will be replaced as Director of CRU by anyone who isn’t a warmist. Of *course* that is what would happen.

    People, there is a serious, significant, and legitimate scientific dispute about what has caused the global warming (which is certainly real and scientifically uncontroversial –what has caused it is the source of controversy) of the last 35 years. Jones, Mann, Briffa, Santer, et al *believe in their hearts and minds*. Don’t think otherwise.

    My fantasy choice for Director of CRU is a warmist who at least believes in the tenents of science at a bone-deep level –transparency, collegiality, iteration, reproducibility, and skepticism. Yes, gasp!, skepticism! It is in fact one of the cardinal tenets of the scientific method for proving a theory.

  32. As a thought experiment, imagine we had been following the Kyoto protocol for the last 11 years. The AGWers would be saying that the earth is cooling slightly, obviously due to reductions in CO2 emissions and we would never have a hope of convincing politicians otherwise. This would result in loud calls for even more reductions.
    Likewise, if any Copenhagen reductions were to eventuate, and temps dropped a little, we would be in the same position.

  33. As I stated in earlier posts, lawsuits are bound to come out not to mention a possible Congressional investigation. This has the possibility to seriously derail Cap and Trade or Copenhagen. Phil Jones will be the fall guy. There is just too much money involved. The Team, in this respect, has been pretty niave. Political cover can only goes so far. Once they’ve become liabilities they are expendable. Look for Jones to be offered some “consulting” in exchange for his scalp (who knows, perhaps with ALGORE). Once the supeonas are issued, the game is up. The activists must get a handle on the situation fast.

  34. They must ALL go; Hansen, Jones, Mann, the English guy in New York called something (oh, yes, Gavin), the IPCC. the EPA. The LOT must go; jobs and all, gone. OUT. DEMONS. OUT.

  35. These people are criminals that have cost us Billions in bogus research results. Hang em high I say. They need to be prosecuted!

  36. “In the frenzy of the past few days, the most vital issue is being overshadowed: we face enormous challenges ahead if we are to continue to live on this planet.”
    Phil Jones

    Wow, I didn’t even know kicking them off was an option.

  37. In my Firefighting days this would be called a “Mongolian Cluster —-”
    No leadership no direction, and all were complicit….

  38. Moonbat is throwing Jones under the bus……notice he make no reference whatsoever to the real scandal emerging in the Data. He purely concentrates on the e-mails.

    Seeing as he has devoted his life to AGW, there is not a cats chance in hell, that he hasn’t seen what is coming out of the Data files.

    This is no genuine mea culpa, it’s sacrificing Jones, in the hope that the real dirt can still be ignored.

    Anyone that can write this ain’t changed his mind one iota.

    The greatest tragedy here is that despite many years of outright fabrication, fraud and deceit on the part of the climate change denial industry, documented in James Hoggan and Richard Littlemore’s brilliant new book Climate Cover-up, it is now the climate scientists who look bad. By comparison to his opponents, Phil Jones is pure as the driven snow

  39. Last week, Friday or Saturday, I said they’d be tossing someone under the bus to save the movement. Leave it to the dingbat to come through in predictable form and call for Jones’ head. The rest of the monkey brigade’s laying low, assuming the positions {hands over eyes, ears, or mouth}.

    Two things must happen before the science behind climate studies can be rehabilitated:

    1 – Raw data, methods, procedures, computer programs, etc. must be fully transparent and available to all for attempts at replication.

    2 – End the phony facade of approved peer-review journals. While skeptics have had studies appear in non-approved journals, they’ve been ignored. This doesn’t disprove them; they still have as much credibility as the so-called peer-reviewed studies (I’ll scratch your back-you scratch mine).

    What would a healthy, vibrant climate science arena look like? It should look like a war arena with raging controversy as scientists rip each other’s studies apart, beating each other upside the head until they all gain some sense and one day, start to figure out how all the myriad factors interact and magnify or dampen others and move beyond the pathetically lame anthropogenic forcing that the whole science seems to be stuck on.

  40. I have read Monbiot’s article of Nov 25. Although I find his tone generally distasteful, I must agree that Phil Jones should resign. However, the matter should not end at that: there is now a good case for seeking full disclosure of CRU data, models and correspondence pertaining to their climate models and projections. No doubt, this would lead to the demise of CRU but, with any luck, a more honourable institution may arise – better deserving of public trust.

  41. Its not enough for Jones to resign. CRU and GISS must release all of the information that they have been hiding. I suspect that the Congressional Subpoena will be sufficient to get the GISS material into the public domain.

  42. Even if Phil Jones gets hung out to dry that’s not enough, not nearly enough.
    This thing is far bigger than a few disreputable scientists. People like Al Gore planned to make huge sums of money from it. And his cronies in the Democratic party were only too happy to go along, licking their chops over the prospects of increased tax revenue, and more regulations inflicted on the public. These people were either the biggest morons on the planet or they were criminally involved.

    Heads need to roll and many of those heads are attached to Democratic politicians.

  43. The cover up will have to be global in scope.

    Be on guard about your thermometer, they may “gigger” them at the factory from now on.

    Sort of dilute the mecury or some such.

    Lies covered in bs.

  44. BTW Democrats not allowing Christopher Monckton to testify along side Al Gore is as big a crime as Jones trying to silence skeptics.

  45. debreuil (20:31:24) :

    Quote of the year:

    “[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75″

    Food of the year – Fudge.

  46. I also suspect that the various agencies and universities are looking for cover. I suspect you’ll see these guys fired for reasons other than scientific fraud. Jones will go because of FOIA, Mann will go for falsifying the H-index on the committee application, Briffa will go for aiding in tax evasion, Santer will go for making workplace threats (after the Fort Hood thing, there is zero tolerance for threats in the Federal Government). All of these things are easily proven, while scientific fraud is exceedingly difficult to prove. What will Copenhagen look like when all the leaders have been fired from their jobs? Might create some ‘gaps’, in the agenda. Oh well, I guess it will give people more time to eat the nice food.

  47. The left wants this to go away fast. They believe that if Jones steps down soon the scandal will fizzle out before the full impact of the email,s and especially the code, hits.

    I hope Jones hangs on for a few weeks, pulling in all the IOU’s he has gathered over the years with the team.

  48. Spenc BC (20:22:44) :

    This should work. Talk about unrepentant!

    http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/nov/homepagenews

    Dear Oh! Lore, what do they imagine the world is thinking right now? They must think the MSM penetration is manageable somehow.

    “We have, therefore, decided to conduct an independent review, which will address the issue of data security, an assessment of how we responded to a deluge of Freedom of Information requests, and any other relevant issues which the independent reviewer advises should be addressed.”

    Scope, appointment, visibility, transparency, funding … sheer arrogance? Unbelievable! Moonbat’s got one thing right, their PR is about as much use as a chocolate fire guard.

  49. i understand that PAX OBAMINUS will drop by to wag his head from side to side at the Copenhoax meeting. seems to be unphased by any of the “climategate”
    issues.
    any word on possible legal recourse— isn’t frightening children a form of child abuse? any lawyers in town ? i don’t recall seeing any comments from “the bar ” on this site

  50. What about scientists calling for his removal from IPCC activities? Not inconsiderable Dr. Hans von Storch :

    1. Data must be made public so that “adversaries” may check the analysis. [Now this is the basic prinicple of science]. This must be enforced!
    2. Scientists like Mike Mann, Phil Jones and others should no longer participate in the peer-review process or in assessment activities like the IPCC!

    http://coast.gkss.de/staff/storch/

  51. Releasing the GISS and CRU information will not improve our understanding of climate, only of the CF job they did of analyzing it. Their analysis *and their data* should be recognized as tainted beyond use and placed in the scientific equivalent of Yucca Mountain, not to be touched by humans ever again.

    It’s like a bad Windows install – format the drive and be done with it, don’t select “repair”.

  52. Does anyone doubt that this reaches much farther than just the usual suspects? Why, for an example, was the IPCC strong woman Susan Solomon a recipient in number of the confidential emails that discussed how to refuse FOI requests?

    And I suggest you read Pielke Sr’s weblog on Thomas Karl, the head of NCDC, how he used strong arm tactics to supress any criticism of the surface temperature record. And how the leaked emails show Phil Jones congratulating Karl on Pielke’s resignation, Jones suggesting Karl should just ignore Pielke’s criticism.

    Phil Jones is in the centre of this affair because it was CRU correspondence that was leaked. If it was GISS do you have any doubts that Hansen, Gavin et co would be in similar situation or worse? And the same for Mann and Penn. Uni goes without saying.

    The whole IPCC review process should now be placed in doubt, the tentacles reaching far and wide.

    If the Church of CO2 can get away with just the resignation of Jones, this is a battle lost. The target should be the whole house of cards before they manage to re-group.

  53. The term “Climategate” is getting around, yesterday putting into Google brought up 200,000 responses. I tried again about 5 hours ago and it had increased to 880,000. I just tried again a few seconds ago and it is now at 3.7 million results – still wont generate it automatically in Google’s “helpful suggestions” though.

  54. Strange times indeed.

    But amongst the ideologically committed the rot of disillusion can spread with amazing speed. See George Orwell on the Spanish civil war.

    The mass support which is never quite that committed moves much more slowly which is why this will take its time to play out.

    But when you see this kind of dissension from fervent advocates who feel betrayed be sure a split in the movement will happen.

    I suspect Monbiot knows that and is trying to avoid it by sacrificing a scapegoat. Show trials serve the same purpose.

    The point being that although there are huge vested interests at stake they are very disparate to say the least, and if they cannot be held together, whether by the prospect of profit, power and influence their coalition will dissolve. And those prospects are dwindling rapidly.

    The reality is that the hard base of political support is tiny, ideological greenery is no true mass movement but is seen by its many lukewarm supporters as vacuous but worthy: they are against sin you see.

    Mere fellow travellers, provided they can purchase redemption for a few pennies they feel happy and virtuous.

    But asking them to sacrifice jobs and their standard of living is like ordering mercenary troops to fight to the death: they don’t and won’t.

    And as Monbiot also seems to appreciate those who live by the sword die by it. The MSM may have played along and still is for the moment, but if it senses a change in the wind it can turn with terrifying speed. Ask any so called celebrity. The MSM sells news and opinion and the story of AGW fraud will sell even better than the awful warnings it once generated: that’s stale news now.

    So watch closely as the ground shifts, the politicians shuffle, business and investors run for cover, and the Green movement moves onto environmental damage or some such other chimera. All in slow motion for your delight.

    If it had not been so costly the whole farce would have been highly amusing.

    Kindest Regards

    He may succeed or not

    when the cheerleaders in the media call for change in the ranks of those they support

  55. ON the NIWA werbsite:
    “NIWA confirms temperature rise
    Home › Our Science › Climate › Climate – News › NIWA confirms temperature rise
    Warming over New Zealand through the past century is unequivocal.

    Combining Temperature Data from Multiple Sites in Wellington
    NIWA’s analysis of measured temperatures uses internationally accepted techniques, including making adjustments for changes such as movement of measurement sites. For example, in Wellington, early temperature measurements were made near sea level, but in 1928 the measurement site was moved from Thorndon (3 metres above sea level) to Kelburn (125 m above sea level). The Kelburn site is on average 0.8°C cooler than Thorndon, because of the extra height above sea level.”

    I would like to see the temperature records of Kelburn and Thorndon. 0.8 seems huge. And how do you get a difference of 1.9C anyway? Seems extraordinary

  56. debreuil (21:08:32) :

    “In the frenzy of the past few days, the most vital issue is being overshadowed: we face enormous challenges ahead if we are to continue to live on this planet.”
    Phil Jones

    Wow, I didn’t even know kicking them off was an option.

    NOM!

  57. Spenc BC (20:22:44) :
    “This should work. Talk about unrepentant!

    http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/nov/homepagenews/CRUupdate

    1. They keep on talking about “stolen data” – i.e. a hacker attack. Has anybody in the UK asked the police if this robbery has been reported? I it under investigation? If anybody know a tame crime journalist, they might be able to get past the Police PR people.

    2. If it was a hacker attack then UEA should be REALLY worried.

    You see, once hackers have actually gained access to a network, the don’t have time to wander around selecting interesting stuff and juicy emails. They just grab everything they can, as fast as they can, to analyze later. So if it was a hacker, we can expect more information to be released in a week or so, when the excitement starts to wane.

    3. If the file was left on an open server, they might claim that it was stolen, but others might claim that it was placed their for public consumption – grey area I think.

    4. If it was an inside job by a disaffected employee, then the whistle has been blown, and I think there are protections under UK law for that. Also whistleblowers tend to get a lot more sympathy than the organization they work for. Hence UEA’s focus on point 1.

    5. Whether it was stolen or not is a red herring – it does not detract from the seriousness of the admissions in the emails. I am not a lawyer, but I believe that evidence is evidence irrespective of how it was obtained, although if it were stolen, then there may be other indictments involved.

    This whole thing goes right to the top – everybody’s credibility is shot – including whoever teaches (or fails to teach) the scientific method and professional ethics to student climatologists.

    Methinks these Professors profess too much.

  58. Is Denier more related to Holocaust Denier than say Warmist is to Racist, or Facist?

    It is an argument of the non-greenhouse-theorist movement I don’t get. The term “holocaust” in “holocaust denier” surely is the key, not the “denier” bit. I could be a denier of many things, or has the word “denier” ceased to exist on its own without subliminal reference to the holocaust? What word can I use for people who deny other things nowadays if denier has been scrapped?

  59. “and the Green movement moves onto environmental damage or some such other chimera. ”
    And they should never have left it for the whispers and promises of politicians and snake oil vendors who seek only to line thier pockets.
    Wake up Green Movement: Go back to the Superfund-type cleanups and getting toxic wasted dumping into rivers and oceans under control. If you cling to these phonies they will drag you down with them. Breathing clean air and drinking clean water has wide support.

  60. When the current practices in science get cleaned up, I expect links to the following to be included with every published paper:
    1. the raw data,
    2. peer reviewer comments and responses,
    3. all mathematical adjustments and assumptions, and their basis, and
    4. equipment descriptions.
    And most important of all, I am sick and tired of having fees required for the general public (and students) to see anything more than the abstracts.

  61. What is it they say, never make predictions…especially about the future. Anyway, just for fun, here are my predictions. The Universities and Agencies are now starting to wake up to the magnitude of the problem they have and the fact that this story is not going away. Receiving a congressional subpoena is — unsettling — to say the least. The people involved will not resign. Instead, the agencies and universities will look for a quick way out — they will act quickly to limit their liability. So I think people will be fired for reasons other than scientific fraud. Jones will go because of FOIA obstruction, Mann will go for falsifying the H-Index on the committee application, Briffa will go for aiding tax evasion, Stanter will go for making workplace threats and for contributing to a hostile work environment. Of course, all of these things are just alleged at the moment. But each could be quickly proven, while scientific fraud is exceeding difficult to prove. My guess, mid-next week the axe begins to fall.

    “Yes senator, we took immediate action as soon as we were alerted to wrong doing – but we stand by the science.”

  62. “In the frenzy of the past few days, the most vital issue is being overshadowed: we face enormous challenges ahead if we are to continue to live on this planet.”
    Phil Jones

    And what you did was make the job 10x harder.
    Hide the Decline, Dog ate the Data = driving the wrong way on the freeway.
    Thanks for nothing, pal.

  63. If justice exists, Dr. Phil should not be sent to a Western style prison. He should be sent to spend his life as a starving child in Africa under his own prescriptions.

  64. Rereke Whakaaro (21:59:54) :

    1. They keep on talking about “stolen data”

    They don’t, nor does anyone, except the people who did it, know how the 62 mb was obtained and let out to the public.

    I don’t like the repetitiveness of saying it was stolen. Repetitiveness is what theyalways do when they propagandize.

    The file may have been legally released. Or, it may have been illegally done. Let’s all wait to know how it was done before we call it anything.

  65. Cap and Trade is dead. Copenhagen is dead. The big problem is the EPA. Can these revelations be used via lawsuit to shutdown the EPA? After all, the data they are basing their findings on is now suspect.

  66. Mattb, I believe what they are implying is a “denier of the inevitable”. Once you step out of science and into the politics, you see that they are using tools of the Progressive movement. They don’t talk in terms of “if” or “might”, they use “will, are, and is” the definite. To them, there is no Global Climate Change debate. Debate implies two or more sides that may be correct in their own ways. They are in a position where they must not loose; therefore there can be no debate. That’s why “The Science is Settled” in their minds. They are saying there is nothing we can do to stop what is happening. Deniers, Skeptics, what ever the term that is used is in the way of their ultimate goal. That is why you see such hatred in their emails, and that is what it is. Hate.

    Until you can analyze what their true goal is, you cannot see what the big picture is. I personally do not believe their goal is to find the truth; it is to manufacture “a truth”. That is why it is so important that you scientists get your hands on the real raw data as soon as possible. I have learned so much from your blogs and boards, but I am yet a novice. But I do know people and understand the politics behind all this.

    Our future is in your hands….no pressure :)

  67. There are no victories here, Monbiot is still shrieking the world is burning up, my guess is he wants to close this thing down before someone in government, or the Royal Society starts an investigation and finds “it’s worse than we thought.” Monbiot believes Jones’ resignation will give closure and they will be able tot carry on as before spouting “the science is settled.2

  68. The sad thing is that these thefts are working with government all around the world to steal possibly trillions of dollars of our money…These people are trying to force policy change that will harm America and every first and second rate nation on earth. These people are not only traitors towards the united states, but also towards all of humanity and its advancement. It harms all.

    Since these sciencist are the founders of the global warming theory, and holds much of the power over the IPCC and the models that are presented to the world. It would be my guess that the theory has been destroyed? Or are there other organizions that are private from these people showing the same thing or close to it??? I pray that it has been totally disproven.

    I would look at the satellite data for the closest estimate of the real temperature of earth. I believe the global temperature has been very stable over the last decade with up’s and downs around .2c both ways. Yes, the temperature did go down sharply during the last few years, but have bounced around.

  69. Today I suggested to a colleague (teacher) that he should google Climategate. He did, and was amazed at what he found. He went around telling people about it.
    The general population has still not heard of this in Australia. Mind you, Tony Abbott has just resigned from Turnbull’s Shadow Cabinet so he can vote against the ETS. More to come. The Senate is dragging out the debate, and the longer they take the more voters will hear of this story and start to doubt the government’s propaganda.
    Good on you, Anthony. Keep up the good work.

  70. Don’t you think that they think they need to accept a few accusations, and suffer a small defeat or so in order to keep the deception train on path?

  71. A new news article appeared in ninemsn.com.au –

    “Senior Liberal frontbencher Tony Abbott has resigned from the shadow cabinet fuelling speculation Malcolm Turnbull may soon face another leadership challenge.”

    Basically Mr Abbott resigned because the party leader, Mr Turnbull would not concede to delay the vote on the emissions trading scheme.

    Interesting week in Australian Politics – link here

    http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/976445/abbott-expected-to-quit-libs-frontbench

  72. Nigel Lawson: Climate science has turned into religion

    Lawson was Chancellor when Crispin Tickell, then British Ambassador to the UN, convinced Prime Minister Thatcher that man-made global warming was a problem. Despite Tickell lacking any scientific background (he read history at university) Mrs Thatcher took the population campaigner’s views seriously enough to make a landmark speech on global warming. This led to the foundation of a branch of the Met Office, the Hadley Centre at Exeter, to study the issue. It remains one of the three leading climate institutes.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/25/nigel_lawson/

    Crispin Tickell (Mentors George Monbiot)

    Sir Crispin was President of the Royal Geographical Society from 1990 to 1993 and Warden of Green College, Oxford between 1990 and 1997, where he appointed George Monbiot and Norman Myers as Visiting Fellows

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crispin_Tickell

    Crispin Tickell was one of the Principal Godfathers of AGW religion.
    And now Monbiot feigns surprise at the goings on, when he was Mentored by Tickell??

    A healthy dose of scepticism would be warranted !!

    Tickell’s website is here

    http://www.crispintickell.com/

    Where did IPCC 1990 Figure 7c Come From?

    http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=3072

  73. Wow, since i linked the article above – it has been updated, 2 more shadow cabinet ministers have also resigned

    “Liberal senators will hold a partyroom meeting at 1830 AEDT where Liberal powerbroker Nick Minchin is expected to stand down from the opposition front bench.”

    “Liberal MP Sophie Mirabella has also announced her resignation from the opposition shadow ministry over the emissions trading scheme.

    She said her decision to resign wasn’t easy.

    “It is with a heavy heart that I will cross the floor for the first time in my parliamentary career,” Ms Mirabella said in a statement on Thursday.

    “This will be a vote against Labor’s ETS, not my colleagues.” “

  74. D. King (22:19:47) :

    Proprietary and single-source records is what led to the POSS II plates and the Greenwich plates found in a degraded state, and many early science papers found eaten by mold/ravaged by time.
    Replication of data across many mediums and places has proven to be the key to survival of the same.
    Now look what happened when our temp. data got hoarded by those who had no respect for it. Disgraceful.

  75. The hockey stick sabotaged climate science. So it’s only fair, and ironic, that Jones (and hopefully et al) should go down and the edifice crumble.

    It’s really quite simple, well perhaps simple, but flattening out the climate history of the past 1000 years by suppressing the magnitude of natural climate variation left climate models with a big problem. If the climate models were to successfully predict the future, they had to know the past.

    But the past was a lie.

    And the current decade proved it was a lie. And the models and theory failed.

    The warmers can figure this out for themselves but they won’t.

  76. Climate sceptics have lied, obscured and cheated for years. That’s why we climate rationalists must uphold the highest standards of science

    Jones knew that any incorrect papers by sceptical scientists would be picked up and amplified by climate change deniers funded by the fossil fuel industry, who often – as I documented in my book Heat – use all sorts of dirty tricks to advance their cause.

    The greatest tragedy here is that despite many years of outright fabrication, fraud and deceit on the part of the climate change denial industry

    George, “the fossil fuel industry” is too busy over here grabbing their share of the 100 Billion dollar a year carbon scam that with your help they have managed to create out of fresh air. They have no time to fund “denial”.

    Wake up George, once Copenhagen is over they fully expect this “market” to move into Trillions of dollars and you helped them do it. Congratulations you clown.

    I really hope your book is a success – you are going to need the cash. Those Trillions are going to have to come from somewhere. We tried to warn you.

  77. Monbiot’s column is disgraceful. Who is he calling denialists, scumbags and 100 times worse than Phil Jones in their conduct? Who are these big-oil snake oil salesmen he is referring to? Uninformed readers might make the conclusion that these are allegations about the likes of McIntyre, Watts and Pielke. He must give an explanation.

    And reading that opinion piece it seems obvious that Monbiot’s interest is to see this story die with the resignation of Jones. And he is trying to get his comrades to see the wisdom of that viewpoint before it is too late. He is writing to them.

    Does he not understand that it is exactly the arrogance of the likes of him, and the open contempt that they show to those with differing scientific views that are the real problem here? The behaviour of the likes of Jones are merely symptoms of this tribalistic, self-righteous and self-promoting mindset that has turned science into dirty politics.

  78. debreuil (20:31:24) :

    Quote of the year:

    “[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75

    Oh..wait..wait .. I know this one! er..er NZ temperatures? No? erm.. hadCRUT err.. 2? 3? Tree ring density compensation coefficients ? Err… lottery numbers. no .. no .. er numbers I pulled out of my ass when pressed? Can I e-mail a friend?

  79. I logged in to the Guardian site to leave a couple of comments (as I have been doing elsewhere of late, at NYTimes and Daily Mail, and the like) as my slight contribution; but, for the most part, comments are still so often of the Dr Jones admits that the e-mails don’t read well, Can’t we now leave that good man alone to continue the good fight.

    On another note, has anyone on the environmental side suggested that all these world leaders and experts stay at home and talk by way of the internet?

  80. Strange news here in the UK from the BBC this morning. The Daily Mail reports that Paul Hudson of the BBC received the leaked CRU emails on 12th October – more than three weeks before they were posted to the Russian serve??

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1230943/Climate-change-scandal-BBC-expert-sent-cover-emails-month-public.html

    Hudson said:
    ” ‘I was forwarded the chain of emails on the 12th October, which are comments from some of the world’s leading climate scientists written as a direct result of my article “Whatever Happened To Global Warming”.’

    That essay, written last month, argued that for the last 11 years there had not been an increase in global temperatures.

    It also presented the arguments of sceptics who believe natural cycles control temperature and the counter-arguments of those who think it’s man’s actions which are warming the planet.”

    So if a BBC Journalist was sent the whole CRU email package on 12th October, doesn’t this imply that the entire thing was a leak by a whistleblower inside CRU rather than a hacker operating from outside?

  81. rbateman (20:56:42) :

    What a ghastly thing to do.

    Nah. Just another day at the global warming office.

  82. ” John Ryer (20:09:09) :

    Anthony, I absolutely applaud your coverage of this. Nobel prize material.

    Instead of resignation, the CRU shouold be called upon to go back to the baseline data, reconstruct their predictions (if they can), and make it available and transparent to all.

    This is a far harder path for them then their resignation. It is also professionally correct.”
    ————————-

    Here here! I suspect that this will be the last thing that they will do.

    They will squirm and wriggle and maybe ask people to stand down and who knows what else, but open up all the data and method?

    If they had nothing to hide, this should have been their first response. IE, if you claim our data/method is suspect, here we’ll do it again and let everyone see exactly how we did it!

    Why resist releasing data? why resist moves for an independent inquiry?

    It looks very suspect.

    As for Monbiot, well, he is only criticising their response, their spin, here. NOT the fact that the data itself is incredibly suspect. He is still stuck in the limited hang-out of “a few emails” and trying desperately to limit this scandal’s fall-out to that.

    He is desperate because the code comments and the read me file expose the “inconvenient truth” that Monbiot refuses to touch with a bargepole. This scandal is not just a few massively incriminating emails, it is also the outright admission of scientific fraud.

    After reading the explosive Harry_read_me file, there is no way that anyone with a neuron firing can have any confidence in the veracity or dependability of the raw data. It was a total and complete mess.

    When it is known (so blindingly obvious) that the CRU has a massive bias in favour of the AGW hypothesis, surely they should take extra measures to be even more open than normal to dispel any charge that their research is skewed by their bias? Instead we see them refusing FOI requests to hide incomprehensibly poor data, cobbled together with admission of invention, “smoothing” meaning hiding declines, and all sorts of dodgy practices to produce a temperature reconstruction that an enormous amount of other “peer-reviewed” science uses as a key assumption.

    If this reconstruction is the benchmark by which the computerised climate models are calibrated, it is no wonder they all fail to project future patterns!

    When a major and massive bias is inherant in the team, surely that team must seek to dispel any notion that they allowed that bias to manifest itself anywhere in the research process? Hiding the raw code and withholding data do nothing to dispel this notion and instead will reinforce it.

    Monbiot’s limited hang-out is a cynical and deliberate attempt at distraction from the inconvenient truth that the science is not sound, reasonable or beyond reproach. In fact it appears to be an almighty fudge that is rigged to fit the hypothesis and as such, undermines the entire AGW argument, possibly fatally.

    Monbiot is acting like a car salesman saying, “OK, I admit that the brochure could have been presented better and I am not happy with the printers,” whilst we have had a little accidental glimpse under the bonnet (hood) and we are telling him with alarm and shock that there is no F*ing engine!!!

  83. rbateman (22:03:15) :

    “and the Green movement moves onto environmental damage or some such other chimera. ”
    And they should never have left it for the whispers and promises of politicians and snake oil vendors who seek only to line thier pockets.
    Wake up Green Movement: Go back to the Superfund-type cleanups and getting toxic wasted dumping into rivers and oceans under control. If you cling to these phonies they will drag you down with them. Breathing clean air and drinking clean water has wide support.

    The problem is the American environmentalist movement was started mostly by a bunch of starry eyed kids. A great idea to stop pollution and clean things up. But many of them ended up following socialist and communist gurus whose real goal was making over the USA into their ideal, with them on top of the heap.

    By the 1980’s most of the cleanup job was done and over with only rather small garbage to pick up. There wasn’t anything left big enough to qualify for Superfund. To make matters “worse” the two guys who founded Greenpeace quit and went into the *gasp* petroleum and forestry industries.

    The Greens could’ve easily bent their efforts towards other places polluted far worse than anywhere in the USA had ever been, but those countries for the most part had (and most still have) socialist and communist governments. To the radical leftist Greens, such governments NEVER do any wrong.

    Being idealistically unthinkable to dare point out the real environmental disasters caused by their favorite despotic countries, they had to come up with *something*, some problem to pin on the now squeaky clean West.

    And thus, here we are today. Let’s hope the first chink in THIS wall leads to the whole thing being torn down.

  84. Amazingly, the headlines at Drudge are still on ClinateGate. Now there are 5 headlines on ClimateGate there at the top of the page.

    http://www.drudgereport.com/

    One of the headlines links to this :

    Scientist in climate change ‘cover-up’ storm told to quit

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1230635/Scientist-climate-change-cover-storm-told-quit.html

    So this looks like the game plan : get someone to resign, make them the lone nut, act like the problem is gone, then go back to business as usual in AGW.
    As soon as the lone nut is gone then immediately go back to saying every scientific organization in the world that’s worth anything says man is causing climate to change. So action needs to be taken immediately.

  85. Magicjava,
    Thanks for the link to your blog. It’s very good and I put it straight away into my favourites.

  86. Oh! This thought just hit me! *ouch!* Have you heard of the Black Sox scandal with the 1919 World Series of baseball?

    Mann et. al. – the “Black Sox” of science. I’m thinking black wristbands with their names and Black Sox of Science.

    I hereby declare that to be a public domain idea.

    If you can make some money off it, be my guest. Donating some of the profits to *real* scientific endeavo(u)rs or some non-lefty charity will create good karma…

  87. CRU is in a tricky situation as is Penn State. If Jones or Mann are outright fired, it makes the institutions look bad. I predict that in a few months you will see a few demotions and/or resignations. The people involved will deny that it has anything to do with Climategate.

    That’s essentially what happened at Stanford back in the 1980s in the wake of the indirect cost scandal.

    By the way, it is my opinion that climate science has been thoroughly corrupted by global warming and all the research dollars which have become available. Probably there have been many decent scientists who were displaced in a Machiavellian race to the bottom.

  88. Monbiot is sick.

    He was a founder of the bizarro “Respect Party” – now fronted by George Galloway.

    Look for Google images of George Galloway.

  89. I’m astonished at how rapidly these people are turning on each other. I’d have thought there would have been rather more solidarity among them. I’d have thought Monbiot would have waited a while before calling for Jones’ head.

    There is more honour among thieves,

  90. I should add that Turek’s column quickly moves from general scientific misbehaviour to a brief account of the buccaneering exploits of the CRU crew to a longer discussion of the evils of the theory of the origin of species by means of natural selection.

  91. DAvid Warren has an article at Real Clear Politics, The Skeptics Are Vindicated:

    ‘A computer hacker in England has done the world a service by making available a huge quantity of evidence for the way in which “human-induced global warming” claims have been advanced over the years.’

  92. I just posted this at the CE Journal website where Tom Yulsman agrees with Monbiot.

    http://www.cejournal.net/?p=2341&cpage=1#comment-5277

    The anthropogenic global warming ‘science’ that Tom Yulsman has taken ten years to digest has been supported, driven and informed by the very same people now shown to be behaving improperly and potentially fraudulently.

    It’s one great big circle of scientists, journalists, politicians and environmental activists all sitting on each others lap. Jones and the CRU have just been roughly pulled out of the ring. Others, like Monbiot and Yulsman, sensing an imminent collapse have stood up. The rest are falling one by one, still repeating their favourite mantras about peer-review and settled science as they lie sprawling on their arses.

    What always puzzled me about AGW is the fact that when you offer an alternate view that is actually good news (ie. we’re not going to be burned to a crisp in an apocalyptic thermageddon) you are treated as an apostate. All we ever wanted and all we ever will want is the truth, unadulterated, unbiased and unspun. And as long as we don’t get it we will keep asking the questions that journalists like Monbiot, Yulsman, Harrabin and Revkin should have been asking all along.

  93. One thing I have never understood about these claims of big oil financing skeptics.

    Big oil would love nothing better than increased energy prices. It would be so easy to tack on a few more bucks on each barrel of oil and let the green movement take the credit/blame.

    Net result: more profits.

    Seriously, if I was CEO of Chevron or Exxon I would be handing out millions to the green groups, hoping they would get cap and trade in place. At the same time, I would be setting up a carbon credit trading group to milk the derivatives part of the scheme. I would also be setting up an alternate energy group to tap into the subsidies from the various governments.

    Ah, life would be good.

    If the green schemes fail, well, I guess we will just have to keep pumping oil.

    Life will still be good.

  94. It is not the failure of a man, or even a Team. It is a predictable failure of a system, a religious-like system of thought. All the ingredients existed for it to appear: a somewhat hidden religious ideology (Earth as a sentient organism), ideas to fuel it (climate scientists) and the culture of secrecy to hide the inconveniences (anonymous peer-reviewing f.e.). At no time in history such scheme has lead to human advancement (some call it progress), rather the contrary.
    Thus there is no point changing a fuse when the entire network is obsolete. A short term victory does not pre-empt a future defeat. What is need to obliterate this kind of system is enforcing openness. Scientists (the real ones) have the duty to define how to reach the transparency level the public deserves. If scientists don’t do it, someone else (politics, medias) will likely achieve it to his own interest.

    Bye,
    TMTisFree

  95. “What is needed to obliterate this kind of system is enforcing openness.”

    Printed journals, and their necessarily associated gatekeepers, ought to go. They should be given a subsidy to enable them to operate online. There should still be a privileged role for editors and peer-reviewing experts, and a lot of filtering and critiqueing by them. Articles that get a lot of thumbs-down could be flagged and graded unfavorably, and placed in some sort of online Coventry. (On a separate tab, or something.)

    But this necessary elitist preponderance shouldn’t extend to their ability to effectively exclude / mute / utterly marginalize mavericks and non-credentialed outsiders. There should be a place at the table, somewhere, for them.

  96. PS: It doesn’t matter that this greater openness will degrade the average quality of the discussion, and that a lot of second-rate stuff will see the light of day. That’s a small price to pay to avoid faddish hi-jackings of science like CAWGery.

  97. Presumably there is some sort of “teeth” in the Freedom of Information Act? What should they do when people try to cirmcunavigate the law? At the very least the University should be fined heavily. Otherwise what is to stop people just refusing to cooperate with the Act?

  98. Jones, I would assume, has a large role to play in the upcoming Punch-and-Judy show in Copenhagen. Can he possibly do his song-and-dance under the current cloud? But wouldn’t a pre-Copenhagen resignation be equally embarrassing for the jolly CRU?

    Oh, happy day!

  99. Getting rid of Jones might not be as easy for UEA as it appears. Unless granting structures have changed, much of the money received for climate research may be directly attached to Jones, not the UEA. If Jones goes, so goes the money.

    I worked decades ago with a world class researcher who brought bags of money to the school, but it was his, not the school’s. Drove the dept head crazy, because my boss wouldn’t do things the way the head wanted, but in the end, my guy was funding half the dept’s grad students.

  100. Whether Jones is fired or not, whether or not MSM makes more of this, whether or not politicians will now question the science, one thing seems certain. Never again will it be acceptable to refer to skeptics as deniers. And never again can the Gore’s of this world proclaim loudly “the science is settled.”

    At the very least, all those scientists skeptical of the man made greenhouse dogma can now take heart. There has in recent years been a trickle coming over from the warmists camp. Now I hear the distant sounds of the coming flood.

  101. Articles that get a lot of thumbs-down could be flagged and graded unfavorably, and placed in some sort of online Coventry.
    There is no need for that: it is a matter of time for “deficient” science (published or not) to be corrected (and forgotten): the vast majority of scientists is doing good work.
    More importantly, the peer-reviewing process should be reversed as follow:
    1/ the peers should be known to the submitter who can either accept or reject them (to avoid the paper being judged only by name. The balance is the time and work it takes for a scientist to resubmit to another [less appealing] journal);
    2/ the peers have to accept to release their comments publicly (as a mean to avoid buddy-buddy) to publication (online) together with the paper if accepted, and on request from anyone if rejected;
    3/ the peers must be provided all the data, codes and whatever is necessary to be able to evaluate the plausibility of the submitter’s work (and failure to do so enables a prompt rejection with notice);
    4/ if the work has been done using tax-money, the paper has to be available freely online with the comments.
    Other rules could possibly be enacted.

    Bye,
    TMTisFree

  102. Anthony

    I think the AGW group will try to downplay this latest incident as being an isolated affair invovling just a few scientists .Unfortunately the CRU/climategate is only one of many such past incidences like the GISS /US temperature errors and many adjustments ,the Gore presentation errors and data exaggerations, the extent of arctic ice loss, the bristlecone pine proxy hockey stick temperature manipulation, the Yamal tree ring proxy manipuation , NZ temperature manipulation and the list goes on . The AGW science seems to be one of data manipulation, gross exaggeration and unscientific study techniques. Transparency, one of the cornerstones of science and is non existent. The biggest and most fundamental failure being that the science turned out to be flawed. The temperatures went down when the co2 went up .To realize that that the world powers are about make monumental decisions affecting the environmental and financial health of the entire globe on such corrupted science is mind boggling. The entire IPCC group should be replaced and all data re-examined by independent scientists not appointed or working through the UN.

    Do we have a list of the major past wrong doings by the AGW group? It would be useful to demonstrate that this was a regular pattern of misdeeds over a long period and not just an isolated event.?

  103. It is so good to see those despicable PR hacks at Desmogblog squirming after they have spent years trying to smear the reputations of any scientists who took issue with the global warming theology. In true PR fashion, their lead smearmeister Richard Littlemore is calling for Jones to resign. Like Monbiot, the Hoggan PR flacks who write Desmogblog want to lance the boil. They believe this will end the crisis and return things to normal.

    I got news for Littlemore and Moonbat. This thing will not die if East Anglia gases Phil Jones. There is evidence here of data manipulation and suppression on a large scale and it adds up to a fraud that has cost taxpayers in Western countries billions upon billions of dollars. And for what? We will not forgive or forget these CRU fraudsters and the enormous harm they have done us.

  104. Robert Wood of Canada (21:02:59) : They must ALL go; Hansen, Jones, Mann, the English guy in New York called something (oh, yes, Gavin), the IPCC. the EPA. The LOT must go; jobs and all, gone. OUT. DEMONS. OUT.

    I want to point out three more in particular. William Connolley (tyrant and twister of Wikipedia climate science). Littleton of DeSmogBlog (sticker of mud everywhere). Bob Ward (usurper at Royal Society and defamer of Global Warming Swindle, which should have broken the stalemate). Also there are eminences grises behind the scenes at UN IPCC like Maurice Strong.

    Really sadly, I like Phil Jones’ face now I’ve seen it. Perhaps he could be put to work, to do the work that is needed (make public the full data, the full metadata, the full codes, and help make it comprehensible and in a fit state for audit) since he is an expert.

  105. Monbiot has demonstrated some courage and integrity but reading his piece, it can be seen that he spices his product with abundant vitriol toward the opposite side who are apparently worse frauds, heavily funded by big oil – this is a more insidious form of denial.

  106. Perry Debell (06:25:25) : Whom should we propose to head up [CRU] when Jones leaves? I’m torn between Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre. Any other nominations please?

    I don’t think that is a job either would want – except perhaps in some kind of initial consultancy role. I’d rather propose those who have suffered the “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” to mend what “is rotten in the state of Denmark”. For instance, Dr Deming. Ask Tim Ball to step out of retirement. There must be lots more.

  107. … and maybe there will be a lot of jobs needing candidates. Who will replace Pachauri to either wind up IPCC or set it on the transparent footing needed? Who will replace Hansen to tidy up GISS station records? Chiefio????

  108. … I’m on a roll. I want to see the editors of Nature and New Scientist replaced, also the heads of NAS and so on. Now if skeptics who have proved their willingness to suffer rather than toe the line are put at the top, and the others, where possible, are demoted to serve skeptic bosses, but still using their expertise, rather than convicted and sent to jail to serve, would that not produce a win-win situation in the best way possible in this dirty mess?

    Al Gore? Let him shine some WalMart floors.

  109. “Really sadly, I like Phil Jones’ face now I’ve seen it. Perhaps he could be put to work,” Lucy Skywalker

    Wait! Is that the same face that was in the MFGW “Hide the Decline?” If so, and I am no female, he looks liker a conceited, spoiled ass. To see that face is to wish to punch it.

    No, no job for him. Liars should not be trusted till death. Forgive, yes. Trust? Never in this life again!!!

    Sheeseh Lucy! Are non-liars so rare that they can not be found for positions of responsibility?

    Lying is a deadly serious sin.:

    ” But for the cowardly and unbelieving and abominable and murderers and immoral persons and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars, their part will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8 [emphasis added]

  110. Lucy, if you spend any time at the UEA site you quickly see they are from a different culture – one inherently hostile to western thought. The Vice Chancellor who is named as being onboard with the FOIA avoidance scheme – is now running the cover up. I fully doubt anyone with a skeptical view would be allowed into this citadel of climate hokum.

    But then, who in their right mind would want to be associated with the last days of any failed AGW regime?

  111. Re:Douglas DC (21:09:23) :

    In my Firefighting days this would be called a “Mongolian Cluster —-”
    No leadership no direction, and all were complicit….

    Ha! also used in British Army (or at least the bit I served in) to describe escalating events. So from Asleep->SNAFU->Cluster..->Mongolian

    But possibly harsh. There was leadership, namely the Hockey Team. There was direction, namely promote warming, deny MWP/LIA and the unreliability of wooden thermometers, and the emails show complicity. Problem seems to me to be the Team were effectively amateurs at running an information campaign, which is showing now by the way they’re scrabbling to do damage limitation.

    At this point, I’d love to be a fly on the wall at EMS/Fenton/Gore Inc, and to a lesser extent in UK Government. But we have Milliband as our official HMG stunt muppet, so already know whatever response he comes out with is likely to just make the situation worse. I don’t see how Mann or Jones can survive this though.

  112. As someone, like many others, who has a reasonable backround in science I decided many months ago to try & find some proper evidence for AGW i.e. that based on observation & experiment . I was unsuccessful. Take the computer models out of the picture & you get a blank screen. I therefore object to being called “a denier” just because I hold a different view.

  113. Dr. Jones and entire CRU Senior staff could do some good here:

    “Tuvalu, a country whose highest point is just 4.5m above sea level, is extremely vulnerable to climate change. The country has brought a case to the International Court of Justice against developed countries considered most liable for the greenhouse gases that are blamed for global warming.”

    When not under water – Tuvalu can be a lovely island to recreate in.

  114. Is this Godfather III: “The higher I go, the crookeder it becomes.” ?

    Several years ago for personal interest I was searching journal articles for paleoclimate studies that addressed changes in solar activity. I remember reading 2 articles(I hope to find them again) with abstracts that strongly suggested there was an AGW gatekeeper effect for that journal.

    Abstracts concisely summarize the study and list the important findings. That’s it. But at the end of these abstracts they would include a disclaimer saying that there study did not contradict the attribution of CO2 for the current warming trend. This was highly unusual. There studies had nothing to do with CO2 and the editor should have eliminated that last disclaimer.

    I tried to have discussions with the scientists at RealClimate but they would selectively delete any posts that they couldn’t dismiss. I was astounded. If these scientists would manipulate a public website (that I mistakenly thought was to help all people understand climate science), a place where such manipulation was more visible, what would they do behind closed doors?

    Later at the AAAS meetings in San Francisco, either the editor of Science or/and the president of AAAS got up and said “there is no more debate” regards AGW. I was becoming more deeply concerned that the very foundation of science -the debating of methodology, results and conclusions -was being discarded and abused because science had become so politicized.

    I wonder how high this whole climate gate will go. There is a strong effort to play this down as if nothing has happened but clearly there has been attempts by the major players in climate science to exert tyrannical control over the scientific control. The orchestrated attempts to spread the memes o “the consensus agreement” and “there is no more debate” is not only revealed in the hacked emails, but in the words of editors and abstracts that have disclaimers.
    I wouldn’t be surprised if Phil Jones quickly becomes the sacrificial pig, to try and avoid further investigations. They have shown obvious disdain for the scientific process and an important tenet of democracy the Freedom of Information acts. I suspect the Higher we look the crookeder it becomes. I would bet any journal that allowed (required?) an abstract disclaimer, or has pushed the notion that “there is no more debate”, can be linked to these Climate Gate manipulators.

  115. Phil Jones will at some time either take early retirement or be given a ‘sideways’ promotion.

    There is no way he will be fired because to do that risks pissing him off and who knows who will fall out of the CAGW tree?

    DaveE.

  116. “Wait! Is that the same face that was in the MFGW “Hide the Decline?” If so, and I am no female, he looks liker a conceited, spoiled ass. To see that face is to wish to punch it.”

    No, the conceited looking one is Michael Mann himself. The Jones picture is the one that looks like Daniel Craig (at least, that’s what Lucy said.)

  117. George Monbiot is the ultimate hypocrite!

    On the one hand he calls for the resignation of Jones whilst on the other he ‘apologises’ for not being sufficiently diligent in researching AGW in the hope that this absolves him from blame or responsibility.

    When the very foundations of all the poisonous rubbish he has espoused for the last 25 years have been exposed as a huge fraud, he should recant everything he has said and written.

    Then quietly skulk off to a remote Pacific island and contemplate for the rest of his days the harm he has done to millions of his fellow human beings.

  118. Climate Gate – Evangelical eco christian developed some CRU code…?

    All information below are in the public domain, and links are verifiable, except for the bio, as the cru main web server seems to be down at the moment. all the following was simple put together via google searches.

    Please do your own research and decide whether newsworthy or not.

    “Although I have yet to see any evidence that climate change is a sign of Christ’s imminent return, human pollution is clearly another of the birth pangs of creation, as it eagerly awaits being delivered from the bondage of corruption (Romans. 19-22).”

    Sounds like a religion to me.

    Someone who WANTS to believe that humans are bad, damaging to the environment.

    so what you may ask, just another believer…
    The author:

    Tim Mitchell works at the Climactic Research Unit, UEA, Norwich, and is a member of South Park Evangelical Church.
    Yes, this is the guy harry is referring to in that Harry_Read_Me.txt file,

    from this article:

    http://www.e-n.org.uk/1129-Climate-change-and-the-

    Not Dr Tim Mitchell yet, he is just a research student developing the computer models for the ‘researchers’ to use in climate change Reasearch unit.

    Yes, this is the guy harry is referring to in that Harry_Read_Me.txt file, ‘what did tim do’ while trying to make sense of all the code, recreate data, etc,etc,etc.

    “On we go.. firstly, examined the spc database.. seems to be in % x10.
    Looked at published data.. cloud is in % x10, too.
    First problem: there is no program to convert sun percentage to
    cloud percentage. I can do sun percentage to cloud oktas or sun hours
    to cloud percentage! So what the hell did Tim do?!! As I keep asking.”

    Whilst many people of faith are excellent dedicated professional scientists.
    I have a few doubts that an evangelical eco christian (my label), that obviously is passionate and committed to the above, may not be perhaps open as they may think they are, perhaps they should be, to both sides of the debate.

    http://www.e-n.org.uk/2625-Day-after-tomorrow.htm

    “The librarian chooses to rescue an old Bible, not because he believes in God, but because its printing was ‘the dawn of the age of reason’. In this film we see how far we have fallen. Lost, we retreat into a virtual world where disaster becomes entertainment and the unreal seems more real than reality itself. ‘For whom tolls the bell? It tolls for thee.’

    Dr. Tim Mitchell,
    climate scientist”

    Dr Tim now, obviously left CRU around 2004, as published research papers dry up at
    this time. Apparentally on a new more spiritual direction.

    http://www.e-n.org.uk/searchpage.php?term=mitchell

    2004
    Dr. Tim Mitchell,
    formerly a scientist, now a student at LTS

    2006

    http://www.e-n.org.uk/3639-Rhythm-of-the-rain.htm

    Dr. Tim Mitchell,
    Highbury Baptist Church;
    formerly of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research

    Tim Mitchell is apparently now a student, at LTS:

    London Theological Seminary
    Evangelical Protestant college for the training of preachers and pastors. Provides degrees up to Masters level. includes course details and resources.
    http://www.ltslondon.org

    googled following sentence for his bio, link now down/unavailable on cru website:

    In 1997 I moved to Norwich to carry out the research for a PhD at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia. …

    Tim Mitchell bio: ( a little bit changed to CAPS by me)

    In 1997 I moved to Norwich to carry out the research for a PhD at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia. My subject was the development of climate scenarios for SUBSEQUENT USE BY RESEARCHERS investigating the impacts of climate change. I was supervised by Mike Hulme and by John Mitchell (Hadley Centre of the UK Meteorological Office). The PhD was awarded in April 2001.
    http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/~timm/personal/index.html – Cached

    So basically 12 years ago , a phd student working on thesis, put together some code, which would appear to have evolved into the mess ‘harry’ is trying to sort out make sense of,

    Did anyone think, it was teams of professional programmers developing robust code?
    testing models, validating data sets, archiving, backing up,etc,etc,etc

    phd students, probably self taught in fortran (ancient), followed by subsequent students, with the professors probably knowing absolutely nothing about programming, telling the students they SUPERVISE, what to do and the results they are expecting according to their theories (no pressure there then, directly or indirectly to get your phd)
    Back to the code, and the harry_read_me.txt file. The code and datasets, will destroy this department, and AGW, if not, there is truly no hope for real science

  119. One should not miss that while Dr. Jones was doing his best Captain Queeg impersonation about organized campaigns to keep him from working via FOIA because CRU received “double digits” (one suspects he means less than 20) in two years, in the US the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) received 11,492 FOIA requests *in one year*, FY2008. See here: http://www.justice.gov/oip/foiapost/2009foiapost16.htm

    Keep that context in mind when Phil Queeg starts rolling the balls around in his hand ranting about McIntyre and his minions plotting to bury him in FOIA.

  120. Further to Paul Vaughan (14:04:28) …

    btw:
    This relates to:
    1) Phil Jones’s plan to change ~1945+ temperatures.
    2) serious missing links in climate science’s understanding of the terrestrial hydrologic cycle (including CLOUDS).

  121. This is slightly off topic, but it seems to me the constant focus on Phil Jones and his shenanigans — though necessary simply to expose the extent — may ultimately be a problem.

    The constant calls for his resignation seems to me that the establishment cabal will simply use him as the fall guy, along with one or two other light weights, and then it will be back to usual with the damage control spin being “there were a few rogue scientists and they have been released and so now everything is fine — move along nothing to see here.” There might be a whitewash investigation that will come to the same conclusion.

    This is the standard cover-up damage control play in these situations, and has been used very effectively time and time again to appease the public that nothing serious happened and get back to “business as usual” — i.e. nothing really changes: new players/leaders, same game.

    I’ve yet to see truth really prevail in any major scandal involving any large entrenched establishment (military, govt, academic, etc.) despite intense heat from the internt because too many vested interests are involved, too many people have too much too loose and so whatever the reason ( pay-cheques, reputations, etc.) everyone joins the bandwagon to have a fall guy out of self-interest and preservation.

    Not sure what the solution is.

    Furthermore, as we’ve seen in the spin from Phil et al in the few statements that have been issued so far, is that the CRU data-set is one of 4 temprature data sets and all 4 are consistent with each other. Given that we now know CRU’s is essentially doctored rubbish, it is self-evident the others must be too as it seems the all the custodians are a very small clique who are directly or indirectly related to the hockey team.

    Therefore it seems to me that the data from these other organizations needs to be outed also and unless there are similar FOI requests pending (or stalled — which would indicate something to hide again) at the US institutions, we’re going to find the spin “we’re only one of 4 data-sets and we’re all consistent with each other” win over the public. Because it is a reasonable explanation absent evidence (read leaked data) to the contrary from the other organizations.

  122. PR Guy (21:25:15) : ” . . . What will Copenhagen look like when all the leaders have been fired from their jobs? Might create some ‘gaps’, in the agenda. Oh well, I guess it will give people more time to eat the nice food.

    Ummmm. Lutefisk.

  123. debreuil (21:08:32) :

    “In the frenzy of the past few days, the most vital issue is being overshadowed: we face enormous challenges ahead if we are to continue to live on this planet.”
    Phil Jones

    Wow, I didn’t even know kicking them off was an option.

    This just proves what I’ve suspected all along: they’re aliens. Where are the MIB when we need them?

  124. With regard to “deniers” it seems to me that, even forgetting the Holocaust, the real “deniers” are the IPCC et al; they are, after all, denying the real science.

    Also, It is good to see that these ‘deniers’ are being found out.

    Congratulations to the person or persons who released the files; you’ve done Climate Science a great service, well done.

  125. Yertizz (11:51:43) :

    George Monbiot is the ultimate hypocrite!

    On the one hand he calls for the resignation of Jones whilst on the other he ‘apologises’ for not being sufficiently diligent in researching AGW in the hope that this absolves him from blame or responsibility.

    This is similar to the excuse Al Gore has taken to using in recent months. He is saying what he believed about global warming was what others told him about it.

    So now he is saying co2 doesn’t control all of climate change, just 40%. Some day he will change that too and blame someone else for it.

  126. DaveE (10:14:08) :

    Phil Jones…There is no way he will be fired because to do that risks pissing him off and who knows who will fall out of the CAGW tree?

    What a wonderful wistleblower he could become.

  127. Lucy Skywalker (07:56:16) :

    Who will replace Hansen to tidy up GISS station records? Chiefio????

    Boy would I like to see that!!

  128. From what I get from all of this, and to my surprise, no one is claiming these are adulterated or faked. If that is the case than Dr. Jones and several others have shown themselves in a very bad light. In fact I would go so far as to say they have demonstrated an amazing lack of intellectual integrity or a total lack of understanding of the scientific method. Regardless of which is the case I would say resignation or other from their various posts would be the minimum required.

Comments are closed.