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.
I went browsing the emails for info on General Circulation Models, and stumbled on this little exchange: http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=1004&filename=.txt
I thought it a nice example of what scientists really get up to when discussing topics between each other.
…I just read the Douglass, et. al. paper… I’m not a climate scientist, and am not sure what to make of it, but I don’t like their treatment of the models. I’ve only had basic statistics and spatial analysis courses, but their methodolgy seemed a bit wacky.
Now that the conspiracy is outed, and the perpetraters are being condemned in the media (finally), can we get back to doing real, and new science and not justifying previous work on the same topic that is contradicted by junk science and junk scientists?
for all the skeptics of the skeptics.
it is easy to confirm that an email is real. it would be on the servers even after they were deleted.Authorities (scotland yard) could match up the data on the labs servers with the so-called hacked data to see what is real and what is not.
I think we will see that in fact the emails and “hiding the decline” are actually what has been going on.
It really sucks. Science is becoming a prostitute. Shame on acaemia
Following the money trail:
Can anybody name 2 scientists who aren’t paid directly or indirectly by government (that includes Friends of the Earth) or charities/foundations specificly committed to alarmism who have said catastrophic warming is real. That excludes statements along the lines of “most of the 20thC warming (0.6C) may be anthropogenic” but genuine catastrophism.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/
“If authentic…one only wonders who gets the tv/books rights for this stuff?”
Micheal Crichton maybe?
he did already write the book about it 4 years ago. (State of Fear)
Great foresight on his part, and quite a bit of vindication if all this turns out to be true
Glenn Beck gives an excellent summary of ClimateGate:
Geoff C (14:24:37) :
Morbid (10:53:22)
That is very interesting about learning how to fit data to your hypothesis in your University degree stats module.
Would you care to name the University, and module number with dates? That would be a bombshell like the current topic.
Yes I second that request. A quote from your “Stats module” against the quote from Richard Feynman would do very nicely to show laymen the difference between the “New Science” and real science.
Though an AGW skeptic, I find it difficult to believe that Dr. Jones and many of his colleagues have been doing what many people seem to believe they were doing. Let’s wait for Dr. Jones’s explanation and, maybe, an objective investigation before declaring him a crook.
If they have tempered with surface temperature data sets, it would mean a catastrophy for climatology and many other theoretical and applied sciences and their practical applications. This goes beyond and above the global warming controversy. Let’s hope it has not happened.
Just been on the UK Channel Four News tonight.
Ray
These hackers must be made to stand trial. Suppose they next choose to irresponsibly scatter notes from the highest level meetings of the EU, the USA, China or Russia? The finest efforts of the servants of the people must never be subject to the chaos of hooligans.
Revoke the hackers’ retirement income. Deny them medical care. They must no longer enjoy the right to buy, grow or otherwise obtain food. Free speech, needless to say, will be off their plates as well. Forbid others to assist them. Here is the model: The kulaks were liquidated for the sake of history, and we survived.
Argument is counterproductive. Consensus is settled. They have forfeited their right to appeal. Mankind must be protected from rogue elements.
Another download link:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=75J4XO4T
If the link above doesn’t work anymore (it does as of this posting) here’s a google search link so that you can find it from someplace else if need be.
http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&hl=en&source=hp&q=FOI2009.zip&btnG=Google+Search
Beware of packs that bill themselves as legitimate but are suspiciously small in size since anything less than 61mb is probably a virus.
I just fainted!!!
From link: http://a-place-to-stand.blogspot.com/2009/11/climate-fraud-bbc-newsnight-report-it.html
In the rest of the media George Moonbat, the Guardian’s standard bearer on all things eco-fascist has said
It’s no use pretending this isn’t a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I’m dismayed and deeply shaken by them.
… But there are some messages that require no spin to make them look bad. There appears to be evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being released, and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request.
Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics, or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign. Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.
@ur momisugly Tom Bright
You name is a misnomer. You are not bright. These people revealed information that is absolutely necessary for the people of the world. Are you a flat out communist? For the destruction of the Constitutional Republic?
Many of the people we trusted to do research on this topic were hiding data and faking graphs. The hackers need to be given full retirement for saving the world form the most dangerous legislation every created by Evil self centered people. Go back to sleep.
Reply: I let this through because despite the personal attack on another poster it is self embarrassing. You really should learn to recognize sarcasm mr. anonymouse. ~ ctm
VictorP:
“Though an AGW skeptic, I find it difficult to believe that Dr. Jones and many of his colleagues have been doing what many people seem to believe they were doing. Let’s wait for Dr. Jones’s explanation and, maybe, an objective investigation before declaring him a crook.
If they have tempered with surface temperature data sets….”
Ah, but beyond the datasets and the computer code (which look damning at first blush but *may* have explanations), these files contain (to my lawyerly) mind *clear and convincing* evidence of collusion to suborn and subvert the peer review and publication process: an ethical violation of the first order.
This is enormous, because the basic rhetorical gambit of the warmist cabal has been the assertion of a claimed ‘consensus’;- but if the consensus was manufactured, an artifact of backroom politics, then the props are kicked out.
I suspect that this aspect will have a very substantial impact on the broader scientific community- the thousands and thousands of working scientists not directly concerned, who have taken AGW essentially on faith because they trusted the integrity of the process. These are folks who know what the Rules are, and what constitutes cheating.
If someone was to go through all my personal emails and messenger accounts and letters, they’d probably have enough “evidence” to jail me for …ooh, quite a long time. Why? Because I dare use colloquial language, I mention biting people for one thing, and various other misdemeanors.
Several calmer heads have mentioned that this could be cooked up, either partially or completely. The most ..ah.. “damning” evidence is that email that mentions “trick” and “hide the decline”, which, I note, Fox News highlighted all pretty-like, just so no-one could possibly miss. Jones et al could have denied it. They could have said that that one was seeded. They didn’t. They came out and said which were theirs. He said that he did say that, and stated exactly why he said it and what the terminology means.
These are people, just like you all are. And they are scientists. For a true scientist, proving something false is just as exciting as proving something true. The scientist that proved unilaterally and “beyond reasonable doubt” that climate change was WRONG would absolutely make his or her career.
There is no conspiracy. They have not placed hairdryers under the icecaps to melt them to prove a point. The science of climate change has changed radically, even in the last ten years. Opinions have changed, new points have been raised, arguments have arisen and been shot down. These men and women are not out to devote their whole lives to fooling people. They are people devoted to their work and who believe in what they study. And in private emails, they use colloquial and unPC language.
Please remember that when you are reading through the results of a massive invasion of privacy and theft, and when you watch the subsequent mudfights and character assassinations.
Where going to live, where really going to live…
I’m happy for the polar bears & the ocean isn’t going to rise 20 feet!
Where is lying Gore to make a statement
[quote= Tom Bright]
Tom Bright (11:38:49) :
These hackers must be made to stand trial. [/quote]
[quote= Tom Bright]Suppose they next choose to irresponsibly scatter notes from the highest level meetings of the EU, the USA, China or Russia?[/quote]
Supposing they do? Supposing they put into the public domain examples of corruption, fraud and treason and worse?
The hackers who have done this great service for all of us deserve to be decorated by the president himself.
I shall be drinking a toast to their continued good health, good wealth ( for it is surely deserved) and continued good fortune in exposing the likes of CRU and the rest of the climate crooks for what they are- The Man who would be king!
[quote= Tom Bright]The finest efforts of the servants of the people must never be subject to the chaos of hooligans.[/quote]
The “servants” of the people it would appear are unaccountable to them.
When faced with such people talk is of no value.
Hooliganism is probably the only way forward when all else fails.
[quote= Tom Bright]Revoke the hackers’ retirement income. Deny them medical care. They must no longer enjoy the right to buy, grow or otherwise obtain food. Free speech, needless to say, will be off their plates as well. Forbid others to assist them. Here is the model: The kulaks were liquidated for the sake of history, and we survived.
Argument is counterproductive. Consensus is settled. They have forfeited their right to appeal. Mankind must be protected from rogue elements. [/quote]
The above statements appear to have originated from some hitherto undiscovered species of swivel-eyed loon, frothing at the mouth, such that im minded to think of the following:
“I am Locutus of Borg.
Resistance is futile.
From this day forward you will service Us.”
Seek help Tommy Bright, seek it now.
http://www.examiner.com/x-25061-Climate-Change-Examiner~y2009m11d24-Legal-fallout-of-Climategate–CEI-to-sue-NASA
Some idiot could’ve come here and said what “Bright” said, so I wouldn’t be too hard on the ones who thought he was for real. Bright is the one who should be talked to about his attempts at humor. Part of the success of humor is being so over-the-top that your reader intuits you’re joking. Bright needs to study more.
It’s not a shocker that global warming issue might have scientists who might exaggerate their data, and their published data is painted with crafty equations, articulated with a first-class intellectual rhetoric.
The fact is this, they are measuring equations with variables that are immeasurable, thought there might be some patterns in smaller noticable “climate change” due to dirty pollution… their persuasive logic inundates the listener with one reason, “better safe than sorry.”
They don’t KNOW anything.
It all shares the same root in evolution vs. creationism.
The issue of global warming surfaces one major issue. Is there a God, or can we actually destroy this planet?
As far as humanity goes, this is another vicious cycle in our human nature. Manipulation & Control.
Hmm, I wonder what embarrassing information we’d find if we hacked the computer records of climate change sceptics (Andrew Bolt in Australia for example) and made the information public? Anyone’s draft documents, from any side of any discussion would look bad, guaranteed.
Glenn Beck sucks by the way. If you want to discredit these findings throw Glenn Beck in the mix.
Greenpeace isn’t all bad. Patrick Moore http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Moore_%28environmentalist%29#Global_warming has not jumped on the freak out band wagon.
We do run the risk of this information being censored though. All the data should be posted somewhere or put out on a bit torrent so too many people will have the data to suppress it. If it is too wide spread it will be imposable to get a court order against one web site or one person to suppress the data.