Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
123 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
vg
December 2, 2009 4:18 pm
Re MSM Media: They will simply forget about AGW. Notably Australian newspapers are simply publishing anything that has nothing to do with AGW very interesting development all of a sudden it just ain’t interesting….LOL I think you will find this worldwide with MSM. It will simply vanish as a subject. Slowly the research will be wound back etc…
geo
December 2, 2009 4:20 pm
Obviously since it was Jones email store that was hacked, we don’t know what we don’t know about what Mann’s email store would show (and no, that is unequivocally NOT a call for a second hack job, this time on Mann). Having said that, it does seem that Mann comes across in what we do have much better than most of the others. Indeed, they seem to a degree to be keeping him at arm’s length and not really engaging him on their own doubts about his work.
What a nothing interview – they didn’t ask any real questions of him. Disappointing as they could have actually maybe shed some light on the situation and Mann’s thoughts on it.
AdderW
December 2, 2009 4:24 pm
“So, it’s a distraction…”
Oh my, was that all he could come up with, so lame.
DocMartyn
December 2, 2009 4:24 pm
Professor in climate change scandal helps police with enquiries while researchers call for him to be banned
By Fiona Macrae
The scientist at the heart of the climate change email scandal was today interviewed by police about the scandal.
Two plain clothes officers arrived in an unmarked car in the afternoon and took Professor Phil Jones to Norfolk Police’s headquarters in nearby Wymondham to give a statement.
Sources said the interview concerned the theft of emails from the university and alleged death threats since the contents of the emails were released, adding he was being treated as a ‘victim of crime’ rather than a suspect in any criminal investigation.
Detective Superintendent Julian Gregory added: ‘He is one of the people assisting police with their enquiries.’
A spokeswoman for the University of East Anglia refused to comment and said Professor Jones would not be adding to a statement he released on Tuesday.
The professor refused to comment at his detached home in Wicklewood, a few miles outside Norwich.
Meanwhile, researchers are calling for Professor Jones to be banned from contributing to agenda-setting United Nations reports.
Eduardo Zorita, an expert in European climate trends, said that future reports from the UN’s International Panel of Climate Change would lack credibility if Professor Jones was involved in their compilation.
As director of the University of East Anglia’s prestigious Climatic Research Unit, the professor has provided temperature data key to previous reports used by governments around the world when setting climate change policy.
Dr Zorita also said that the content of thousands of emails and documents stolen from the University of East Anglia’s computer system and published on the internet confirmed that some global warming research was riddled with ‘machination, conspiracies and collusion’.
He and colleague Hans von Storch were mentioned in more than 30 documents, with one email referring to Professor von Storch as ‘frankly an odd individual’.
Other emails have been seized on by climate change sceptics as evidence that researchers have been manipulating raw data and discussing ways of evading Freedom on Information requests.
In one of the most damaging emails, Professor Jones seems to suggest using a ‘trick’ to massage years of temperature data to ‘hide the decline’.
In another, he appears to respond to news of the death of climate sceptic John Daly with the words ‘in an odd way this is cheering news!’
Others show British researchers apparently dismissing the work of scientists challenging the global warming orthodoxy as ‘crap’ and a top American climatologist admitting it was a ‘travesty’ that scientists could not account for the lack of global warming in recent years.
Dr Zorita, of the Institute for Coastal Research in Geesthacht in northern Germany, is an expert in climate change over the past 1,000 years and contributed to the most recent IPCC report.
He said that he was aware that his call for Professor Jones and others who wrote controversial emails to be banned from contributing to future reports could harm his career, but ‘the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible any more’.
He said: ‘I can confirm what has been written in other places: research in some areas of climate science has been and is full of machination, conspiracies and collusion, as any reader can interpret from the CRU files.
‘The scientific debate has been in many instances hijacked to advance other agendas.’
The researcher added although he does not believe that manmade climate is a hoax, he and other researchers have been ‘bullied and subtly blackmailed’ to fit in the scientific mainstream.
‘In this atmosphere, PhD students are often tempted to tweak their data so as to fit the “politically correct picture”,’ he said.
‘Some, or many, issues about climate change are still not well known. Policy makers should be aware of these attempts to hide these uncertainties under a unified picture.’
The comments come in the wake of Professor Jones’s decision to stand down from his university work while an independent investigation is carried out.
The professor said that he ‘absolutely’ stands by the science produced by the centre – and that suggestions of a conspiracy to boost the evidence for man-made global warming were ‘complete rubbish’.
Issues to be probed include data security and whether the university responded to Freedom of Information requests.
However, the university was tonight unable to confirm if the data that appears to have been manipulated will be reanalysed.
Environmental chemist Professor Peter Liss will become acting director and further details of the review will be released ‘within days’.
Professor von Storch, director of the Institute of Coastal research, said: ‘This is a brave act on the side of Phil Jones and may be the only way to restore his authority as an excellent scientist.
‘What is left for Phil Jones to do is to restrain from doing review work for journals, and, of course, he should stay away from the IPCC and similar assessment exercises.’
He added that the investigation should be led by a non-Briton and include input from climate change sceptics.
Dr Benny Peiser, director of the British-based Global Warming Policy Foundation, said: ‘What is important is that the university comes clean on this and they don’t fudge the inquiry.
‘We need total transparency on this.
‘If they try to set up some kind of whitewash panel which an inquiry that does not have the total trust of the public it will make matters worse.
‘We have called for a High Court judge to chair the inquiry just to make sure that trust is restored.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … z0YZrQavVh
Hmm..
Let’s hope “policymakers, in general” are smart enough to recognize fraud when it is presented to them, too.
The fact that the data can not be reconstructed or independently verified sure would seem like a major problem to me.
Pingo
December 2, 2009 4:26 pm
Well if I didn’t know better, I’d say he seems a trustable fella. I suppose that is why we’ve ended in the situation we have.
He smiles an awful lot in that interview in a way someone being deceptive does, thinking they are outwitting the audience. I would love to see an expert on facial expressions analyse that video.
Aaron W.
December 2, 2009 4:30 pm
What a snake, I wanted to punch him through my computer screen. Also accuweather didn’t seem too concerned over the emails.
Kilroi1
December 2, 2009 4:30 pm
Baaaaah! Complete non-answer. Face it Mann you’re a fraud and deserve to be “frogmarched” before the public who you’ve attempted to swindle. Bernie Madoff is a glass of spilt milk in comparison to this scam.
Michael
December 2, 2009 4:32 pm
Climategate will not go away any time soon, too many people have heard about it through the Internet and word of mouth. The MSM is irrelevant at this point.
vg
December 2, 2009 4:33 pm
Wiow this is interesting! :”Initially promoted by Enron”
Cap-and-trade, a scheme initially promoted by Enron to allow traders to profit at the expense of taxpayers, is currently before the U.S. Senate. According to the U.S. Treasury, this proposal includes between $100 billion and $200 billion in additional taxes a year, costing an additional $1,761 per family — equivalent to a 15% hike in the personal income tax.
Remove if too OT
chainpin
December 2, 2009 4:36 pm
That was pathetic.
Ray
December 2, 2009 4:37 pm
“Policy makers are smart enough to recognize that”
The policy makers are starting to wakeup to the deception. You should recognize that and get better excuses.
tokyoboy
December 2, 2009 4:43 pm
I wonder whether the IPCC AR5 would come out in due course. Its publication will at least be heavily delayed?
Dave Wendt
December 2, 2009 4:45 pm
I was moved to do a long rant in response to this, but I read a blog post today that covers most of my thoughts with much greater verbal skills than I can bring to bear http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/enemies_foreign_domestic/climategate_first_lie_is.php
Tell me lies,
Tell me sweet little lies.
— Fleetwood Mac
As we all learn whenever we feel the teeth of truth’s bear trap snapping closed the first lie told to escape the trap is, in retrospect, the most illuminating. This “primal” lie is the one told in haste and either repented or embroidered later as the truth begins to inexorably emerge. That is why to connoisseurs of lies the first and freshest lies are always the most delicious when it comes time to fry them up.
So it is with the first and most primal lie of ClimateGate; “the emails don’t amount to much at all.” This was the first lie to come out of the mouths of the Alarmists and their supporters and it was yummy. This lie was, indeed, the main “Talking Point” (i.e. Group Lie) for a number of days until a deeper examination of the emails themselves and the read-me files and the comments in the programs gave their first lie and indeed their whole enterprise the lie.
Looking back it is easy to see that the emails, far from being just trivial statements exchanged between pals, partners in deceit, and collegial others, were indeed the window into the entire mind-set that drove and sustained what is looking to be the largest and most far-reaching hoax in the history of science; a hoax perpetuated across decades by dozens if not hundreds of “scientists” for the sake of “saving the planet” and money, and fame, and status, and power. Indeed, this hoax makes Bernard Madoff look like a street-corner three-card-monte hustler. Looking through the window provided by the emails you can discern, with no effort of imagination whatsoever, the much greater real-world environment in which the hoax was born, grew, took on a life of its own, and was fed and sustained until it swept the whole world into its maw.
Think about your own collection of emails written to friends, associates, and colleagues over the years. They form, taken en masse, footnotes and journal entries that document your life. Email does not exist in a vacuum. It replicates in outline the conversations, phone calls, meetings, work sessions, bull sessions, conventions, and all the other multifoliate actions that define your days. So it is with the HadlyCRU emails.
You don’t need to read the thousands of messages. Just read around in them and you’ll get the picture soon enough.
Read it all at the link, it’s worth the effort.
Michael
December 2, 2009 4:47 pm
I feel that it was a damaging interview for him and climate scientists. It hit all the main topics and the average person will go away thinking where there’s smoke there’s fire.
regards
Michael
“It’s a distraction?” – Michael Mann, say what? Now who’s the denier?
Mann’s sure playing it cool, which is to be expected considering the size of his balls for fudging the data all these years as the creator of “ManN Made Global Warming Climate Change”. It’s not just Mann’s career at stake, it’s his freedom should any of the fraud allegations be proven in a criminal case against him. He might actually believe his own lies in which case proving “actus reus mens rea” could be difficult. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actus_reus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea
George E. Smith
December 2, 2009 4:50 pm
Well Mann said it; iut is a distraction.
Meanwhile the World Health Organisation ranking world health risks in 2004, placed Global Climate Change at number 24 on a list. Number one was underweight, while number 10 was overweight. Unsafe sex came in at number two on the list.
And that underweight problem scored at 90.4, while climate change managed a miserable 5.4 score. I’m sure it is in some SI units that I am not privy to.
In short, climate change is barely on the radar screen of WHO concerns. but that didn’t stop the new UN General Secretary or whatever his title is, from saying he would make it his #1 concern for the UN.
Yes Dr Mike (I guess we can call him that) climate change is a distraction alright.
I love the last comment: “It’s a distraction, and I think policy makers in Washington are smart enough to understand that.”
Yeah, just stroke that liberal ego. Works every time. If you agree with me, you are smart.
Disgusting.
He finishes up with policy … pretty transparent stuff. Nature is on board protecting this now as well.
Larry Geiger
December 2, 2009 4:59 pm
Dendrochronology is not a mature science yet. Certainly not for studying the temperature record. I think that Mann may have acually been sucked into something way over his head. If this wasn’t so important to global economics, he would have continued to study and publish and might have eventually, in collaboration with many other scientists, created some useful knowledge.
Re MSM Media: They will simply forget about AGW. Notably Australian newspapers are simply publishing anything that has nothing to do with AGW very interesting development all of a sudden it just ain’t interesting….LOL I think you will find this worldwide with MSM. It will simply vanish as a subject. Slowly the research will be wound back etc…
Obviously since it was Jones email store that was hacked, we don’t know what we don’t know about what Mann’s email store would show (and no, that is unequivocally NOT a call for a second hack job, this time on Mann). Having said that, it does seem that Mann comes across in what we do have much better than most of the others. Indeed, they seem to a degree to be keeping him at arm’s length and not really engaging him on their own doubts about his work.
Intellectual dishonesty at it’s finest.
What a nothing interview – they didn’t ask any real questions of him. Disappointing as they could have actually maybe shed some light on the situation and Mann’s thoughts on it.
“So, it’s a distraction…”
Oh my, was that all he could come up with, so lame.
Professor in climate change scandal helps police with enquiries while researchers call for him to be banned
By Fiona Macrae
The scientist at the heart of the climate change email scandal was today interviewed by police about the scandal.
Two plain clothes officers arrived in an unmarked car in the afternoon and took Professor Phil Jones to Norfolk Police’s headquarters in nearby Wymondham to give a statement.
Sources said the interview concerned the theft of emails from the university and alleged death threats since the contents of the emails were released, adding he was being treated as a ‘victim of crime’ rather than a suspect in any criminal investigation.
Detective Superintendent Julian Gregory added: ‘He is one of the people assisting police with their enquiries.’
A spokeswoman for the University of East Anglia refused to comment and said Professor Jones would not be adding to a statement he released on Tuesday.
The professor refused to comment at his detached home in Wicklewood, a few miles outside Norwich.
Meanwhile, researchers are calling for Professor Jones to be banned from contributing to agenda-setting United Nations reports.
Eduardo Zorita, an expert in European climate trends, said that future reports from the UN’s International Panel of Climate Change would lack credibility if Professor Jones was involved in their compilation.
As director of the University of East Anglia’s prestigious Climatic Research Unit, the professor has provided temperature data key to previous reports used by governments around the world when setting climate change policy.
Dr Zorita also said that the content of thousands of emails and documents stolen from the University of East Anglia’s computer system and published on the internet confirmed that some global warming research was riddled with ‘machination, conspiracies and collusion’.
He and colleague Hans von Storch were mentioned in more than 30 documents, with one email referring to Professor von Storch as ‘frankly an odd individual’.
Other emails have been seized on by climate change sceptics as evidence that researchers have been manipulating raw data and discussing ways of evading Freedom on Information requests.
In one of the most damaging emails, Professor Jones seems to suggest using a ‘trick’ to massage years of temperature data to ‘hide the decline’.
In another, he appears to respond to news of the death of climate sceptic John Daly with the words ‘in an odd way this is cheering news!’
Others show British researchers apparently dismissing the work of scientists challenging the global warming orthodoxy as ‘crap’ and a top American climatologist admitting it was a ‘travesty’ that scientists could not account for the lack of global warming in recent years.
Dr Zorita, of the Institute for Coastal Research in Geesthacht in northern Germany, is an expert in climate change over the past 1,000 years and contributed to the most recent IPCC report.
He said that he was aware that his call for Professor Jones and others who wrote controversial emails to be banned from contributing to future reports could harm his career, but ‘the scientific assessments in which they may take part are not credible any more’.
He said: ‘I can confirm what has been written in other places: research in some areas of climate science has been and is full of machination, conspiracies and collusion, as any reader can interpret from the CRU files.
‘The scientific debate has been in many instances hijacked to advance other agendas.’
The researcher added although he does not believe that manmade climate is a hoax, he and other researchers have been ‘bullied and subtly blackmailed’ to fit in the scientific mainstream.
‘In this atmosphere, PhD students are often tempted to tweak their data so as to fit the “politically correct picture”,’ he said.
‘Some, or many, issues about climate change are still not well known. Policy makers should be aware of these attempts to hide these uncertainties under a unified picture.’
The comments come in the wake of Professor Jones’s decision to stand down from his university work while an independent investigation is carried out.
The professor said that he ‘absolutely’ stands by the science produced by the centre – and that suggestions of a conspiracy to boost the evidence for man-made global warming were ‘complete rubbish’.
Issues to be probed include data security and whether the university responded to Freedom of Information requests.
However, the university was tonight unable to confirm if the data that appears to have been manipulated will be reanalysed.
Environmental chemist Professor Peter Liss will become acting director and further details of the review will be released ‘within days’.
Professor von Storch, director of the Institute of Coastal research, said: ‘This is a brave act on the side of Phil Jones and may be the only way to restore his authority as an excellent scientist.
‘What is left for Phil Jones to do is to restrain from doing review work for journals, and, of course, he should stay away from the IPCC and similar assessment exercises.’
He added that the investigation should be led by a non-Briton and include input from climate change sceptics.
Dr Benny Peiser, director of the British-based Global Warming Policy Foundation, said: ‘What is important is that the university comes clean on this and they don’t fudge the inquiry.
‘We need total transparency on this.
‘If they try to set up some kind of whitewash panel which an inquiry that does not have the total trust of the public it will make matters worse.
‘We have called for a High Court judge to chair the inquiry just to make sure that trust is restored.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … z0YZrQavVh
Hmm..
Let’s hope “policymakers, in general” are smart enough to recognize fraud when it is presented to them, too.
The fact that the data can not be reconstructed or independently verified sure would seem like a major problem to me.
Well if I didn’t know better, I’d say he seems a trustable fella. I suppose that is why we’ve ended in the situation we have.
The police have arrived for Jones.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1232722/Professor-climate-change-scandal-helps-police-enquiries-researchers-banned.html
He smiles an awful lot in that interview in a way someone being deceptive does, thinking they are outwitting the audience. I would love to see an expert on facial expressions analyse that video.
What a snake, I wanted to punch him through my computer screen. Also accuweather didn’t seem too concerned over the emails.
Baaaaah! Complete non-answer. Face it Mann you’re a fraud and deserve to be “frogmarched” before the public who you’ve attempted to swindle. Bernie Madoff is a glass of spilt milk in comparison to this scam.
Climategate will not go away any time soon, too many people have heard about it through the Internet and word of mouth. The MSM is irrelevant at this point.
Wiow this is interesting! :”Initially promoted by Enron”
Cap-and-trade, a scheme initially promoted by Enron to allow traders to profit at the expense of taxpayers, is currently before the U.S. Senate. According to the U.S. Treasury, this proposal includes between $100 billion and $200 billion in additional taxes a year, costing an additional $1,761 per family — equivalent to a 15% hike in the personal income tax.
Remove if too OT
That was pathetic.
“Policy makers are smart enough to recognize that”
The policy makers are starting to wakeup to the deception. You should recognize that and get better excuses.
I wonder whether the IPCC AR5 would come out in due course. Its publication will at least be heavily delayed?
I was moved to do a long rant in response to this, but I read a blog post today that covers most of my thoughts with much greater verbal skills than I can bring to bear
http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/enemies_foreign_domestic/climategate_first_lie_is.php
Tell me lies,
Tell me sweet little lies.
— Fleetwood Mac
As we all learn whenever we feel the teeth of truth’s bear trap snapping closed the first lie told to escape the trap is, in retrospect, the most illuminating. This “primal” lie is the one told in haste and either repented or embroidered later as the truth begins to inexorably emerge. That is why to connoisseurs of lies the first and freshest lies are always the most delicious when it comes time to fry them up.
So it is with the first and most primal lie of ClimateGate; “the emails don’t amount to much at all.” This was the first lie to come out of the mouths of the Alarmists and their supporters and it was yummy. This lie was, indeed, the main “Talking Point” (i.e. Group Lie) for a number of days until a deeper examination of the emails themselves and the read-me files and the comments in the programs gave their first lie and indeed their whole enterprise the lie.
Looking back it is easy to see that the emails, far from being just trivial statements exchanged between pals, partners in deceit, and collegial others, were indeed the window into the entire mind-set that drove and sustained what is looking to be the largest and most far-reaching hoax in the history of science; a hoax perpetuated across decades by dozens if not hundreds of “scientists” for the sake of “saving the planet” and money, and fame, and status, and power. Indeed, this hoax makes Bernard Madoff look like a street-corner three-card-monte hustler. Looking through the window provided by the emails you can discern, with no effort of imagination whatsoever, the much greater real-world environment in which the hoax was born, grew, took on a life of its own, and was fed and sustained until it swept the whole world into its maw.
Think about your own collection of emails written to friends, associates, and colleagues over the years. They form, taken en masse, footnotes and journal entries that document your life. Email does not exist in a vacuum. It replicates in outline the conversations, phone calls, meetings, work sessions, bull sessions, conventions, and all the other multifoliate actions that define your days. So it is with the HadlyCRU emails.
You don’t need to read the thousands of messages. Just read around in them and you’ll get the picture soon enough.
Read it all at the link, it’s worth the effort.
I feel that it was a damaging interview for him and climate scientists. It hit all the main topics and the average person will go away thinking where there’s smoke there’s fire.
regards
Michael
“It’s a distraction?” – Michael Mann, say what? Now who’s the denier?
Mann’s sure playing it cool, which is to be expected considering the size of his balls for fudging the data all these years as the creator of “ManN Made Global Warming Climate Change”. It’s not just Mann’s career at stake, it’s his freedom should any of the fraud allegations be proven in a criminal case against him. He might actually believe his own lies in which case proving “actus reus mens rea” could be difficult.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actus_reus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea
Well Mann said it; iut is a distraction.
Meanwhile the World Health Organisation ranking world health risks in 2004, placed Global Climate Change at number 24 on a list. Number one was underweight, while number 10 was overweight. Unsafe sex came in at number two on the list.
And that underweight problem scored at 90.4, while climate change managed a miserable 5.4 score. I’m sure it is in some SI units that I am not privy to.
In short, climate change is barely on the radar screen of WHO concerns. but that didn’t stop the new UN General Secretary or whatever his title is, from saying he would make it his #1 concern for the UN.
Yes Dr Mike (I guess we can call him that) climate change is a distraction alright.
Hansen gives and interview to the Guardian trolly :http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/02/copenhagen-climate-change-james-hansen
I love the last comment: “It’s a distraction, and I think policy makers in Washington are smart enough to understand that.”
Yeah, just stroke that liberal ego. Works every time. If you agree with me, you are smart.
Disgusting.
He finishes up with policy … pretty transparent stuff. Nature is on board protecting this now as well.
Dendrochronology is not a mature science yet. Certainly not for studying the temperature record. I think that Mann may have acually been sucked into something way over his head. If this wasn’t so important to global economics, he would have continued to study and publish and might have eventually, in collaboration with many other scientists, created some useful knowledge.