Government petition started in UK regarding CRU Climategate

Also signed, and cheers for all the hard work in posting all this quality material up, reading the new posts has become the highlight of the day, especially since ClimateGate broke out.

I signed.
“You are now signed up to this petition. Thank you.
For news about the Prime Minister’s work and agenda, and other features including films, interviews, a virtual tour and history of No.10, visit the main Downing Street homepage
If you’d like to tell your friends about this petition, its permanent web address is: http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/UEACRU/
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to suspend the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia from preparation of any Government Climate Statistics until the various allegations have been fully investigated by an independent body. More details
Submitted by Mike Haseler – Deadline to sign up by: 24 February 2010 – Signatures: 105
More details from petition creator
The Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia is a “leading centre” for the investigation of “manmade global warming” and government policy relies on the integrity of these statistics. Several claims have been made: that data was “cherry picked” to make the 20th century temperature rise look exceptional in historical terms; emails suggest the unit has colluded in “tricks” to “hide the decline” in a high profile scientific journal, and this unit has colluded in active, secret and highly political campaigning through the website “realclimate”.
The preparation of climate statistics require many judgements: stations move & sites become surrounded by urban sprawl (urban heating) & a judgement must be made of the size of the offset to apply to the global temperature record. The University accepts most emails are genuine so it appears the Unit has been acting in a highly partisan way incompatible with that of a neutral body preparing and interpreting government data. We call on the PM to suspend all further use of the climate research unit until all pertinent allegations have been investigated and any action (if any) has been undertaken.”
Very long list of co-signatures I am delighted to report.

**********************
Henry chance (14:27:46) :
Watch the money dry up. I suspect the guildt by association will have a wide reach.
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/Pope_L.pdf
They cry “taken out of context”
Here is what it is like if Jones and Mann discuss a paper from someone they don’t like.
*************************
Hopefully, all climate scientists whose publications have been interfered with by the Hockey Team will speak up. It would be interesting to see how much of a problem this has been.

Signed.
However, for the uninitiated, it’s an unfortunate fact that this government takes not the slightest notice of these petitions. They’re merely the faux-face of a ‘nanny-knows-best’ regime.

My direct line of ancestors immigrated to N. America in the early 1600’s. Does that make me an “ex-pat”? 😉 If so I’ll sign the petition.

Don’t like the wording of it! Too soft! I’m waiting for Senator Inhofe to get things stirred up properly. Those polls are set up so you won’t get a confirmation email possibly for days.It started when there was a ‘ Do we hate Brown’ poll and they didn’t want the true number signing up on the first day to be too horrific.

Signed, but Brown will probably turn a blind eye.
Never mind, this you just HAVE to see. Enjoy….
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/11/24/minnesotans-global-warming-mock-climategate

I’ve just signed, and have posted the link on Twitter as well. But commenter Pragmatic (on an earlier thread) also had a very good idea, to write to UEA Chancellor Sir Brandon Gough and send a copy to Charles Clarke (MP for Norwich South and former Home Secretary). Writing a letter makes it more personal, shows that the writer is serious and makes it much more likely for the writer to get an individual reply. What I’ll also do in the weeks to come is write to my local MP and prospective MPs for my local area – in the UK we will have a general election next year (probably in May), so I think it important that those who apply to represent us in Parliament appreciate the depths of our feelings about this scandalous affair. At the moment, none of the three main political parties in the UK are officially sceptical about AGW, but if enough of their constituents come forward with their concerns about the corrupted science of AGW, this, I hope, may well help to prompt members of the next government to re-think their stance on the climate issue.

Completely pointless I’m afraid. Try again in 6 months when we have a new Government. Still melons but maybe not so ripe.

[This is a violation of policy to discuss, although thanks for the support ~ ctm]

Who said this?* Maybe they should follow their own prescription and remove themselves from the scientific community, since they engage in vicious public and hidden attacks on the reputations of individual scientists who disagree with the orthodoxy.
“In my personal opinion, Michaels should be kicked
out of the AMS, the University of Virginia, and the scientific community
as a whole. He cannot on the one hand engage in vicious public attacks
on the reputations of individual scientists (in the past he has attacked
Tom Karl, Tom Wigley, Jim Hansen, Mike Mann, myself, and numerous
others), and on the other hand expect to be treated as a valued member
of our professional societies. “
*[answer: Ben Santer of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory about CATO’s Pat Michaels in 1255095172.txt]

Inhofe Begins Hadley Center “Climategate” Investigation
Warns Participants to Retain Documents
Washington, D.C.-Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, today sent letters to several scientists, some of whom allegedly manipulated data to prove the scientific “consensus” of global warming, as well as to the inspectors general of several federal agencies, notifying them to retain documents related to the release of emails from the Hadley Center’s Climate Research Unit.
“The stakes in this controversy are significant, as it appears that the basis of federal programs, pending EPA rulemakings, and cap-and-trade legislation was contrived and fabricated,” Sen. Inhofe said. “Moreover, it appears that, in an attempt to conceal the manipulation of climate data, information disclosure laws may have been violated.
“I certainly don’t condone the manner in which these emails were released; however, now that they are in the public domain, lawmakers have an obligation to determine the extent to which the so-called ‘consensus’ of global warming, formed with billions of taxpayer dollars, was contrived in the biased minds of the world’s leading climate scientists.”
The letters are the first step in the investigation of the Hadley Center climate scandal. Last week, emails released by a computer hacker revealed that several leading climate scientists allegedly manipulated climate data and research used by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). These scientists also appear to have refused outside access to their raw data, obstructed freedom of information requests, and plotted ways to prevent the publication of papers in peer-reviewed journals by scientists who question global warming alarmism.
Story here;
http://washingtonindependent.com/68878/inhofe-launches-climategate-investigation