UPDATE: Response from CRU in interview with another website, see end of this post.
The details on this are still sketchy, we’ll probably never know what went on. But it appears that University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit has been hacked and many many files have been released by the hacker or person unknown.
UPDATED: Original image was for Met Office – corrected This image source: www.cru.uea.ac.uk
I’m currently traveling and writing this from an airport, but here is what I know so far:
An unknown person put postings on some climate skeptic websites that advertised an FTP file on a Russian FTP server, here is the message that was placed on the Air Vent today:
We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to
be kept under wraps.
We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents
The file was large, about 61 megabytes, containing hundreds of files.
It contained data, code, and emails from Phil Jones at CRU to and from many people.
I’ve seen the file, it appears to be genuine and from CRU. Others who have seen it concur- it appears genuine. There are so many files it appears unlikely that it is a hoax. The effort would be too great.
Here is some of the emails just posted at Climate Audit on this thread:
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7801#comments
I’ve redacted email addresses and direct phone numbers for the moment. The emails all have US public universities in the email addresses, making them public/FOIA actionable I believe.
From: Phil Jones
To: mann@vxxxxx.xxx
Subject: Fwd: John L. Daly dead
Date: Thu Jan 29 14:17:01 2004
From: Timo H‰meranta
To:
Subject: John L. Daly dead
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2004 12:04:28 +0200
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510
Importance: Normal
Mike,
In an odd way this is cheering news ! One other thing about the CC paper – just found
another email – is that McKittrick says it is standard practice in Econometrics journals
to give all the data and codes !! According to legal advice IPR overrides this.
Cheers
Phil
“It is with deep sadness that the Daly Family have to announce the sudden death of John
Daly.Condolences may be sent to John’s email account (daly@john-daly.com)
“
Reported with great sadness
Timo H‰meranta
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Timo H‰meranta, LL.M.
Moderator, Climatesceptics
Martinlaaksontie 42 B 9
01620 Vantaa
Finland, Member State of the European Union
Moderator: timohame@yxxxxx.xxx
Private: timo.hameranta@xxxxx.xx
Home page: [1]personal.inet.fi/koti/hameranta/climate.htm
Moderator of the discussion group “Sceptical Climate Science”
[2]groups.yahoo.com/group/climatesceptics
“To dwell only on horror scenarios of the future
shows only a lack of imagination”. (Kari Enqvist)
“If the facts change, I’ll change my opinion.
What do you do, Sir” (John Maynard Keynes)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0)xxxxxx
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) xxxxxx
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jones@xxx.xx.xx
NR4 7TJ
UK
—————————————————————————-
References
1. http://personal.inet.fi/koti/hameranta/climate.htm
2. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/climatesceptics
From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@xxxxx.xxx, mhughes@xxxx.xxx
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@xxx.xx.xx,t.osborn@xxxx.xxx
Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or
first thing tomorrow.
I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps
to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from
1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual
land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land
N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999
for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with
data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.
Thanks for the comments, Ray.
Cheers
Phil
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) xxxxx
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) xxxx
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jones@xxxx.xxx
NR4 7TJ
UK
—————————————————————————-
From: Jonathan Overpeck
To: “Michael E. Mann”
Subject: letter to Senate
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 16:49:31 -0700
Cc: Caspar M Ammann , Raymond Bradley , Keith Briffa , Tom Crowley , Malcolm Hughes , Phil Jones , mann@xxxxx.xxx, jto@xxxxx.xx.xxx, omichael@xxxxx.xxx, Tim Osborn , Kevin Trenberth , Tom Wigley
Hi all – I’m not too comfortable with this, and would rather not sign – at least not
without some real time to think it through and debate the issue. It is unprecedented and
political, and that worries me.
My vote would be that we don’t do this without a careful discussion first.
I think it would be more appropriate for the AGU or some other scientific org to do this –
e.g., in reaffirmation of the AGU statement (or whatever it’s called) on global climate
change.
Think about the next step – someone sends another letter to the Senators, then we respond,
then…
I’m not sure we want to go down this path. It would be much better for the AGU etc to do
it.
What are the precedents and outcomes of similar actions? I can imagine a special-interest
org or group doing this like all sorts of other political actions, but is it something for
scientists to do as individuals?
Just seems strange, and for that reason I’d advise against doing anything with out real
thought, and certainly a strong majority of co-authors in support.
Cheers, Peck
Dear fellow Eos co-authors,
Given the continued assault on the science of climate change by some on Capitol Hill,
Michael and I thought it would be worthwhile to send this letter to various members of
the U.S. Senate, accompanied by a copy of our Eos article.
Can we ask you to consider signing on with Michael and me (providing your preferred
title and affiliation). We would like to get this out ASAP.
Thanks in advance,
Michael M and Michael O
______________________________________________________________
Professor Michael E. Mann
Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22903
_______________________________________________________________________
e-mail: mann@xxxxxx.xxx Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) xxx-xxxxx
http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml
Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:EOS.senate letter-final.doc (WDBN/MSWD) (00055FCF)
–
Jonathan T. Overpeck
Director, Institute for the Study of Planet Earth
Professor, Department of Geosciences
Mail and Fedex Address:
Institute for the Study of Planet Earth
715 N. Park Ave. 2nd Floor
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
direct tel: +xxxx
fax: +1 520 792-8795
http://www.geo.arizona.edu/Faculty_Pages/Overpeck.J.html http://www.ispe.arizona.edu/
It appears that the proverbial Climate Science Cat is out of the bag.
Developing story – more later
UPDATE1: Steve McIntyre posted this on Climate Audit, I used a screen cap rtaher than direct link becuase CA is overloaded and slow at the moment.
UPDATE2: Response from CRU h/t to WUWT reader “Nev”
http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_briefing_room/2009/11/hadleycru-says-leaked-data-is-real.html
The director of Britain’s leading Climate Research Unit, Phil Jones, has told Investigate magazine’s TGIF Edition tonight that his organization has been hacked, and the data flying all over the internet appears to be genuine.
In an exclusive interview, Jones told TGIF, “It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads of data files and emails.”
“Have you alerted police”
“Not yet. We were not aware of what had been taken.”
Jones says he was first tipped off to the security breach by colleagues at the website RealClimate.
“Real Climate were given information, but took it down off their site and told me they would send it across to me. They didn’t do that. I only found out it had been released five minutes ago.”
TGIF asked Jones about the controversial email discussing “hiding the decline”, and Jones explained what he was trying to say….
UPDATE3: McIntyre has posted an article by Jean S at climateaudit.org which is terribly overloaded. We have mirrored it.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/20/mikes-nature-trick/
Sponsored IT training links:
Improve 646-205 exam score up to 100% using 642-813 dumps and 642-902 mock test.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
George E. Smith (17:53:08) :
“…nothing that is revealed in this hack job, serves to justify what these intruders have done…”
George, if I have been remiss in posting on your blog and telling you how much I appreciate your efforts and point of view, forgive me, please but I really do. We agree on a lot. But not this. In my IT days I devoted considerable effort to keeping snoopers out of sensitive files…. but I was not above monitoring transactions when I suspected that my principals were being cheated. At one customer site I felt compelled to create a transaction register to document where material was disappearing…. sure enough, there was over $5 million of unaccounted for material. Management didn’t want to know.
In this case, I am management and I do want to know. I was willing to tell my principals what I’d done and what I’d found. I expect the hacker to do the same. Keith Briffa and his colleagues are committing crimes against humanity. God forbid we should violate their constitutional rights in exposing them.
Mike Abbott (18:19:41) :
“Furthernore, it is WUWT that is at risk by posting names and addresses, not the individual readers posting that info.”
Not necessarily true, as several legal problems encountered by other Internet sites evidence. WUWT is moderated, plus the claim of offending material in a post originates with an individual not affilitated with WUWT is not an ultimate defense. Anthony could be posting under an alias. WUWT could be “audited” at the least.
And it doesn’t matter how many violations of privacy have occured on the net. Each one is a violation, unless the person(s) themselves willingly provide that information.
Good old Phil….
From: Phil Jones
To: Tom Wigley
Subject: Re: FOIA
Date: Fri Jan 21 15:20:06 2005
Cc: Ben Santer
Tom,
I’ll look at what you’ve said over the weekend re CCSP.
I don’t know the other panel members. I’ve not heard any
more about it since agreeing a week ago.
As for FOIA Sarah isn’t technically employed by UEA and she
will likely be paid by Manchester Metropolitan University.
I wouldn’t worry about the code. If FOIA does ever get
used by anyone, there is also IPR to consider as well.
Data is covered by all the agreements we sign with people,
so I will be hiding behind them. I’ll be passing any
requests onto the person at UEA who has been given a post to
deal with them.
Cheers
Phil
Shouldn’t certain individuals cited in these exchanges perhaps be placed on (academic) suicide watch, or something to that effect?
Sort of like, “Please put your hands above your head where we can see them; please advise us where you keep the keys to the building/your office; please back away slowly from that computer terminal; you have the right to remain silent; anything you say may ….; etc.; etc.”
If real, shocking and in need of a special prosecutor both in the U.K. and here in the U.S.
I see “peer review” written all over this … as in a Monckton peer review?
I verified the md5 hash of the zip file on another computer:
da2e1d6c453e0643e05e90c681eb1df4 FOI2009.zip
md5sum.exe for windows can be found in various places on the internet, if you run linux you probably already know how to use it. If anyone downloads a zip file with a different hash please post the location of the new file here so we can figure out what changed.
Tom in Texas (14:08:37) :
“And, you get to see somebody with the name of phil jones say that he would rather destroy the CRU data than release it to McIntyre.”
******************************************
Where do you see this statement?
This does not look like a hoax from what i have seen so far. It could of course be seeded with a few fake emails like some mentioned but most seems to be real. It would have taken alot of effort and a whole lot of time to fake something like this.
It looks legit but I would hesitate to download copies of the file from sites you are not familiar with. It won’t be long before some huckster uses that file name as a lure to get someone to download something, uhm, unsavory.
Folks, this is real and Cru will do nothing about it. To do so would only expose themselves even worse. They have been caught, period, in playing politics versus reporting science. I have said for 2 years now that AGW is not unlike the financial crisis caused by liar loans and the like. To hell with them.
Crosspatch: note my previous posts on md5sum. Everyone else, I strongly recommend downloading a copy of md5sum from somewhere trustworthy (or better blow away windows and install linux!) Run the sum on any file you download and make sure it matches the one I posted.
Molon Labe (18:29:54)
“Gavin and I are going to be careful about
what comments we screen through”
They are being very careful right now….no new comments on anything in hours. I doubt they feel very comfortable sending emails across the pond.
Is this what you call a Maalox Moment for these guys?
Something tells me these guys are busy consulting their lawyers and barristers right about now
The message posted with the file is:
“We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to
be kept under wraps.
We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents”
This does not appear to be written by someone whose first language is English. The grammer and syntax is all wrong. There is no way someone with limited command of English could have “faked” the above emails. Could this be the Russian government, attempting to put an end to the debate once and for all. They certainly have much to gain.
To easily read the .txt files use this program,
GetDIz
Install warning, uncheck the last 3 boxest that change your browser and search to Ask.com and install the Ask.com toolbar.
Reply: This is not endorsed by WUWT. Install at your own risk. ~ ctm
Rereke Whakaaro (14:37:56) :
“This has the smell of misinformation to me. It is all too convenient and laid-out on a plate.
Most cyber attacks are opportunistic and against soft targets. I doubt that CRU has gaping holes in their security systems, precisely because they fear the risk of attack from people wanting access their data. If the base information is real, then it would be a sophisticated attack. But for what purpose?”
Hypothetically speaking someone who reads this site may be employed by, or related to or friends with someone who is employed by, an agency of the British government that scoffs at the idea of CRU’s network being secure, and has been motivated by the MP scandals this past year to do their part to clean house for queen and country.
I personally have employed a half dozen people at various times in the past year who could have cracked that network like a nut. CRU is NOT a secure network, particularly it isn’t secure against people with higher clearance. There are people, like Lord Monkton, and people loyal to he and his party, who did what needed doing.
One thing I’ve learned in politics is that smoke ALWAYS means fire. ALWAYS.
More of the worst will come when the particpants start pointing fingers like individuals in a band of caught thieves.
adam I was thinking the exact same thing to myself…
previously posted fingerprint: da2e1d6c453e0643e05e90c681eb1df4 FOI2009.zip
my check: da2e1d6c453e0643e05e90c681eb1df4 *FOI2009.zip
looks to be the same by my meager analysis! 🙂
“John in NZ (18:15:40) :
Has anyone told James Inhofe?”
————-
A link to this story has been up at Climate Depot for hours. You can bet that the first person Marc Morano would have contacted is Senator Inhofe.
This is very exciting. We are right on the cusp of things now here in Australia because the government (with a supine leader of the opposition) is determined to pass an ETS next week.
I hope this serves to give them pause.
There are loads of other planets to try Global Socialism on. Meanwhile… we’ll always have Cuba.
Would it be too offensive (and pass moderation) [snip. To answer your two questions. Yes and No. ~ ctm]
Folks,
I really want to believe that what’s now in the wild is genuine and unedited. The reason I want to believe this is that so many of the partisans named in the e-mails I’ve seen posted in comments (haven’t looked at the .zip) have so brutally abused my BS detectors over the last few years. Making press releases ahead of journal publications, stonewalling on data and method transparency and giving nonsense answers to reasoned and valid criticism have, for quite some time now, had the Scotsman in Engineering calling me saying “Captain, the BS detectors ‘r nah gonna take this much lunger!”.
Unfortunately (for at least me I suppose), what I’ve seen of this event to date is setting off those same BS detectors in a big way. Call me naïve, but I simply can’t imagine that folks as smart and determined (if not principled on the face of the evidence prior to this event) as the named Team members would engage in e-mail discussions as presented.
I can buy arrogance (just from a regular read of RC), but the utter stupidity instantiated in the e-mail samples I’ve seen so far makes me instantly skeptical.
Tread cautiously on this.
All of that said, I hope my BS detectors are malfunctioning as a consequence of previous abuse 🙂
OA
It’s nice that someone has dropped a big comb of honey onto this ants’ nest. But all of the inside chatter in these emails, revealing though it may be to those lapping it up, won’t mean a thing to the average news reporter, media outlet, and the public in general.
What’s needed is a panel of unimpeachable individuals (i.e. no one named in this data drop) who can go through the file, vouch for its authenticity, and issue a quick white paper explaining its implications.
The media are clueless. They need to be helped to understand the significance of—
CLIMATEGATE! LEAK OF SECRET EMAILS SHOWS TOP CLIMATE SCIENTISTS ENGAGED IN MASSIVE FRAUD! GLOBAL WARMING WAS HOAX DESIGNED TO ENRICH POLITICIANS AND RESEARCHERS!
/Mr Lynn
This bluntly explains file 0939154709.txt:
http://i49.tinypic.com/mk8113.jpg