This is a mirrored post from ClimateAudit.org which is terribly overloaded.
So far one of the most circulated e-mails from the CRU hack is the following from Phil Jones to the original hockey stick authors – Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley, and Malcolm Hughes.
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
The e-mail is about WMO statement on the status of the global climate in 1999 -report, or more specifically, about its cover image.
Back in December 2004 John Finn asked about “the divergence” in Myth vs. Fact Regarding the “Hockey Stick” -thread of RealClimate.org.
Whatever the reason for the divergence, it would seem to suggest that the practice of grafting the thermometer record onto a proxy temperature record – as I believe was done in the case of the ‘hockey stick’ – is dubious to say the least.
mike’s response speaks for itself.
No researchers in this field have ever, to our knowledge, “grafted the thermometer record onto” any reconstrution. It is somewhat disappointing to find this specious claim (which we usually find originating from industry-funded climate disinformation websites) appearing in this forum.
But there is an interesting twist here: grafting the thermometer onto a reconstruction is not actually the original “Mike’s Nature trick”! Mann did not fully graft the thermometer on a reconstruction, but he stopped the smoothed series in their end years. The trick is more sophisticated, and was uncovered by UC over here. (Note: Try not to click this link now, CA is overloaded. Can’t even get to it myself to mirror it. -A)
When smoothing these time series, the Team had a problem: actual reconstructions “diverge” from the instrumental series in the last part of 20th century. For instance, in the original hockey stick (ending 1980) the last 30-40 years of data points slightly downwards. In order to smooth those time series one needs to “pad” the series beyond the end time, and no matter what method one uses, this leads to a smoothed graph pointing downwards in the end whereas the smoothed instrumental series is pointing upwards — a divergence. So Mann’s solution was to use the instrumental record for padding, which changes the smoothed series to point upwards as clearly seen in UC’s figure (violet original, green without “Mike’s Nature trick”).
TGIF-magazine has already asked Jones about the e-mail, and he denied misleading anyone but did remember grafting.
“No, that’s completely wrong. In the sense that they’re talking about two different things here. They’re talking about the instrumental data which is unaltered – but they’re talking about proxy data going further back in time, a thousand years, and it’s just about how you add on the last few years, because when you get proxy data you sample things like tree rings and ice cores, and they don’t always have the last few years. So one way is to add on the instrumental data for the last few years.”
Jones told TGIF he had no idea what me meant by using the words “hide the decline”.
“That was an email from ten years ago. Can you remember the exact context of what you wrote ten years ago?”
Maybe it helps Dr. Jones’s recollection of the exact context, if he inspects UC’s figure carefully. We here at CA are more than pleased to be able to help such nice persons in these matters.
Sponsored IT training links:
Learn all that you need to pass 220-701 exam. Complete your certification in days using 70-642 dumps and 220-702 study guide.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Maybe CRU can submit a freedom of information act on the Farmers Almanac so they can compare notes. Both seem to be “reasonably” accurate, however the Farmers Almanac may not be considered “peer-reviewed”. 🙂
Posted 3 February 2009:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/21/antarctica-warming-an-evolution-of-viewpoint/#comment-80957
Allan M R MacRae (21:07:14) :
NOW THE WORLDWIDE PRESS IS SWARMING,
‘ROUND ANOTHER
FINE EXAMPLE OF MANN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING!
JUST LIKE THE FAMOUS HOCKEY STICK,
THEY USED THE OLD
“SPLICE TOGETHER TWO DATASETS” TRICK.
***********************
Today’s comment:
Some of us always knew it was a trick.
Now it is absolutely clear that it was much more. It was not just bad scientific methodology; it was deliberate fraud, conspiracy and corruption.
These scoundrels have taken hundreds of millions in government grants and caused the waste of hundreds of billions in public funds.
I hope they are prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
They belong in jail.
>>So AGW is man made. We knew this, didn’t we? Now the rest of the world knows which men made it.
Ha.
Phil & Michael are on the phone right now with officials from ACORN getting advice.
Darn it, I’m getting withdrawal symptoms. The last time I got on to Climate Audit was ages ago.
Granted that when I do, I understand 10% of the Science but absorb 100% of the integrity. Thanks Anthony for giving me a partial fix tonight but, if it pleases the Big One, bring back CA to me!
Loved reading about SMc from the perspective of Team members BTW; that they fear his intelligence is palpable from their evident hatred and fear that he will turn his gaze upon them.
In the 21st century the establishment antipathy towards the gifted outsider is every bit as strong as it ever has been.
Unbelievable, this is tricky stuff.
“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.”
Perhaps this is just a remark stating that he was trying to test if Mike’s Nature trick did, in fact, hide the decline.
Did they find out if the trick did the job?
Did they then produce results knowing the trick was involved?
Those are the real questions.
Don’t these expressions of outrage ring a bit false? The tenor of comments would indicate shock and awe. All the revealed correspondence really does is confirm what most deniers have been accusing those folks of for years and years, either directly or by implication. What is there to be shocked about?
It seems to me a more honest reaction would be, “Yep. Just as we’ve been saying” followed closely by, “Damn! How could they be so dumb as to leave such an electronic trail of their activities?”
CH
Just posted this on Tips and mentioned recently on the “Hacked” thread,
http://www.agu.org is down. Anyone know why, or has recently visited, to get an idea of when it went down?
OT: Only in the alarmist Globe and Mail in Canada can Martin Mittelstaed, an activist/reporter post this while the rest of the media are ablazed with the emailgate!
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canadians-find-shame-in-status-as-climate-change-dawdlers/article1372296/#comments
“Martin Mittelstaedt Environment Reporter
From Saturday’s Globe and Mail
Published on Friday, Nov. 20, 2009 7:38PM EST
Last updated on Friday, Nov. 20, 2009 7:41PM EST
On the eve of major UN climate change talks next month in Copenhagen, a major survey of Canadians has found that more than three quarters of the public feel embarrassed that the country hasn’t been taking a leadership role on reducing greenhouse-gas emissions.”
And where do you think this guilt spewing poll comes from?
“The survey was compiled by Hoggan & Associates, a Vancouver-based public-relations firm that was researching Canadian attitudes toward the environment and sustainable development for a number of major corporations and other entities, including BC Hydro, Desjardins Group, Alcoa, and the David Suzuki Foundation. It is to be released next week”
Hoggan owner of the racist, delationist blog desmogblog that attacks any scientist whose work does not condone AGW… And already this week the same reporter kindly obliged with a plug on the Hoggan book…
A friend of mine recalled it! The poll was done in april by telephone. They started asking some unrelated questions and then little by little asked questions about AGW, BC Hydro etc… tricksters!
Re: RC’s “change of tack”. There is no change of tack. The release of emails gives them a good opportunity to pump the many “skeptic” red herrings that can be used to caricature the opposition. Most threads allow stupid or angry opposition posts for much the same reason. They also allow easy questions that they can easily answer such as in the current thread. They also allow their own partisans to post lies about how censorship-free their website is.
However they do not allow probing questions about the data and how it has been manipulated. That is the case with the current thread. Future threads will undoubtedly have the same or greater censorship as those processes are reverse engineered and pointed out using the zip file data. At that point it will be old news and they will have moved on.
Calling: Robert M. (14:15:43) :
I believe Tax Evasion might be added to your list!
I just spent the last hour over at Real Climate: the longest I’ve ever been able to bear it (thanks to allowing real diversity of comments for once). One thought that occurred to me while reading Gavin’s justification for keeping McIntyre from getting published is that if climate science had any credibility, they would allow even what they consider to be “poor” papers to be published. In every field a wide range of papers is published, or should be: let the other scientific readers decide if the science stands on its own merit. The Hockey Team, which seems to have controlled the publication process, seems to have really feared the light being shone on their methods by McIntyre. Their credibility is in tatters.
As an academic, I have graded my share of undergraduate papers. While still a grad student myself, I found myself perplexed by student papers which used complex language or arcane constructions which I could not follow. It took a couple of years, but I came to realize that if I could not understand what an undergrad was writing, it was not a good paper: the student was trying to pull a snow job. I always have the same sensation on the occasions when I try to make sense of Gavin’s arguments over at RC.
Allan M R MacRae (17:41:38) Not jail, Allan – sentenced to collect real climate measurements for the rest of their lives at solo manned weather stations in Siberia (my wife’s suggestion – far too lenient I think )
I want to thank Anthony and the moderators for keeping up with the posts today.
And I, especially, want to thank Steve McIntyre for his dogged work in forcing this issue. You can tell from the emails that his analysis has always scared the pants off these individuals. That is the biggest compliment one can get from these individuals.
Stacey (15:05:18) :
Roger Harrabin of the BBC writes
My contacts at the CRU tell me the e-mails are being taken out of context and insist they are part of the normal hurly-burly of conversations between scientists working on some of the most complicated questions of our times
.and I posted yesterday that they would claim the e-mails were taken out of context as a defense. They took tree rings out of context also. Jazzed up proxies.
Michael Mann claims to be into math. We all know taking two points and creating a vector is not linear regression analysis. here is no hockey stick.
You can search and read the hacked email correspondence online over here:
http://www.anelegantchaos.org/cru/
Thanks to the ones who put this up.
“Atomic Hairdryer (15:47:11) :
So AGW is man made. We knew this, didn’t we? Now the rest of the world knows which men made it.”
Now, that makes my hair curl…
I said this on CA, so I’m saying it here. The person who got this stuff got a lot more, 60Mb is just a couple of minutes download – heck a thumb drive is Gigabytes. He had to have root rights to get to email. If the person who did this is reading this – I salute you! – I hope you covered your trail, because I’m sure the search is on.
Note to James Hansen, secure your computers.
Do not relent. These frauds must be eviscerated. Show no mercy. Otherwise, they will rise like Mike Meyers in the Halloween series of horror flicks.
Continue to hammer away at them until their fraud has no voice.
We expect truth from our scientists. Anything but truth makes them political tools with cynical agendas.
Please let the adults take back real science (and government).
[To the moderators…great job with the volume today!]
Allan M R …..
No, they belong on a road crew in the American Southwest, during the summer, with picks and shovels making small rocks out of large ones. No shade, and only the water jug (warm) and a portapotty to prevent some lawsuit.
Mike
Comment from Dot.Earth
“If this crime actually has an effect on funding, for example, then I would encourage my fellow scientists to just abandon civil society to its own devices. If society can’t appreciate the vital role of science in addressing societal problems, if this is the kind of behavior scientists have to contend with, then I’d say it’s time to say to hell with society and let it suffer the consequences of ignorance.”
Don’t leave us!!! We need more fraudulent science of teh doomsday!
“Mann” Made and “Philtered” Climate Change…
Red meat
http://www.anelegantchaos.org/cru/emails.php?eid=384
The masking is a ‘fix’ applied to the model
>simulations to adjust them to fit the surface data known to contain
>spurious trends. This is simple GIGO.
This searchable site is great.
searched – “deleted files”
http://www.anelegantchaos.org/cru/search.php
Just plug in words of your choice (this one is “deleted files”) and all the CRU emails with them come up.