Phil Jones steps down – pending independent review

WOO HOO !!
A small step for mankind……………..

Goal!

Hide the decline!

That is really good news.
Will the investigation be genuine?
Stay tuned!

As the old golf joke goes, I recommend Phil Jones give his work a three-week layoff, then quit.

Have the Brits still got the pillory?

All the evidence has been destroyed already, so its a wise move to act like you are gonna be all noble and step aside till they find nothing.

I’m with Mike Smith here. I don’t have too much hope for an honest ‘independent’ investigation.

Professor Phil Jones has today announced that he will stand aside as Director of the Climatic Research Unit until the completion of an independent Review resulting from allegations following the hacking and publication of emails from the Unit.
What is missing here?
until the completion = makes no mention of abiding by the results/decision of the investigation. Is this an omission?
Calls for a clarification.
Please specify what will happen if the investigation uncovers wrongdoing.

This “temporary” sidestep may or may not further implicate Jones, CRU researchers and their “peers”. Kinda like betting on the weather. Flip a coin.

By all means, this is good news, but let us show that we also have a warm and human side here at WUWT – we all do mistakes!

They’ll just conclude he was being silly in his emails

Let’s speculate. The Dean of the university gives Jones an ultimatum. Step aside or be suspended, which will look better?

Professor Phil Jones has today announced that he will stand aside as Director of the Climatic Research Unit until the completion of an independent Review resulting from allegations following the hacking and publication of emails from the Unit.
Professor Jones said: “What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible. After a good deal of consideration I have decided that the best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the Director’s role during the course of the independent review and am grateful to the University for agreeing to this. The Review process will have my full support.”
Vice-Chancellor Professor Edward Acton said: “I have accepted Professor Jones’s offer to stand aside during this period. It is an important step to ensure that CRU can continue to operate normally and the independent review can conduct its work into the allegations.
“We will announce details of the Independent Review, including its terms of reference, timescale and the chair, within days. I am delighted that Professor Peter Liss, FRS, CBE, will become acting director.”
http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/nov/homepagenews/CRUupdate

Mod can you remove my comment?
[Done – Evan]

In all of our glee, we should have a moment of silence for the destruction these guys have wrought:
1) The reputation of science has been trashed in a way that the popes of old could only have dreamt of;
2) Billions of charitable dollars have been wasted over 20 years when they could have gone towards clean drinking water and high quality of life for the poverty-stricken;
3) An entire generation of young children–eager to help “save the planet”–will be growing up in the coming years knowing they were lied to, used and minipulated by adults they trusted.

Wow. Still spinning! Do you really think it was his idea to step aside? After all that’s happened they still give the impression they think we’re all stupid.

step-by-step
Mann should be next.
Hansen and Schmidt soon after.
Go go go!
Each nation with a substantial AGW promotion community should move to audit each and every bit of work related communications, code, data, and finance.
In the US, strict audits according to the federal grant terms.
A Congress interested in finding out what happened to our ~450 billion or so, and holding intensive and thorough hearings on this would not be a bad thing either.
Maybe some lawsuits by those here who have been stymied in their FOIA requests would be in order, as well.
And will someone please do something in a legal sense to shut down that corpulent con artist, Gore?

Watch for this to be a prelude to the “one bad apple” argument. The climate alarmism crowd has sacrified a queen, in the hope that this will create a firewall against criticism of the field in general and enable them to still achieve check-mate in Copenhagen.
We need to start widening the scope off this enquiry to the other institutions and “scientists” involved in the fraud if we wish to avoid junk science being turned into junk policy.

He really had no choice. His very presence was becoming controversial. Stepping aside reduces the heat (pun intended) in Climategate/climate change. It doesn’t, however, really change anything. Any real change in the science will take months, if not years, before it becomes visible.

The only dubious character to have published with Liss as far as I can tell is Lovelock.
Wegman will be pleased.
http://www.uea.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.13484!p_liss_formatted.pdf

Phil Jones resigning changes very little. He is only a man who allowed his ego to obscure the limits of his ability and what was happening around him, he is not alone.
The IPCC chose to link itself with politicians and the environmental movement, this was not a wise move for any of them, or us.
This made deciding what could be a valid science fact from what is a political policy very difficult.

Need an independent investigation. The school investigating their own is only to cover the administration. To say that they did something. Nothing will come of it.

The independent review will probably be Jones’ confederates and fellow travelers. If independent they will still be academics that have their own skeletons. Result: slap on the wrist.

I couldn’t help myself, I posted DEMOLITION at RC too. 😉

Couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy. I certainly hope that the people conducting the review aren’t kow-towing stooges.

Will the “independent review” be more like normal peer review? If so, prepare to see this whole affair swept under the rug in a few months.

Ah, Gardening Leave as it’s known in Blighty. I’m guessing the Inquiry will be as “independent” as the various temperature data sets and proxy reconstructions we all know and love.

Will Steve M. be asked to be on the review panel?

Tobin…very good…very funny…
I think for Phil Jones this is a very serious matter…tenured staff normally do not step aside…I think he is toast…A head of Dept cannot (even at UEA) be seen to be acting in the manner Jones did…you see chaps its just not cricket..

Darn, and just after Phil announced they had recreated the data (humor):
http://co2realist.com/2009/11/30/climatic-research-unit-lost-data-recreated/
(Yes, I did have fun writing this last night!

Jack Thompson — Steps aside not steps down; presumably on full pay. What about his acolytes? What about Dr Mann?
Mann lacks the requisite class.

Chris Monockton should be part of the independent review team.

A time for Humility:
My back gets up when journalist and enviros accuse someone like me of being ignorant or evil because I believe it very difficult to prove that water and CO2 conspire through positive feedback to destroy humanity.
However, I also find much of what I read on other sites (not necessarily this one) unpalatable when people argue that man has not rose CO2 or all Climate Scientist are frauds.
I believe climate scientist can sustain themselves by cutting away the cancerous cells without killing the body. Scientists can take what they have learned about ocean cycles and use it to manage fish stocks. Hurricane researchers can hone their craft and save lives. Can we finally ask scientific questions about drought in Senegal without invoking AGW? Can we talk about deforestation on Kilimanjaro and the effect on local rainfall and get our paper published without paying homage to the AGW? Can we work toward real conservation and efficiency without big banks and international bureaucracies reaping gains on the backs of the poor?
Climate Scientist and other and people who really care about the planet and it’s people need a palatable place to go where they can talk about real issues like energy efficiency, respect for mother Nature, and decorum among people who disagree.
IF you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:
…Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it
Thanks to Anthony for not speaking down to commoners like myself and believing that if given information I could be involved in science and make reasonable decisions.
Phil Jones represents what’s wrong with science, Watts should be what’s right.

This is a very sensible decision.
We know powerful people are shielding him off, so this is a major step forward.
It’s a warning for all the other frauds. They will pay.
In the mean time I am scratching my head when I heard this:
What to think about this message:
http://www.iceagenow.com/Disastrous_snow_and_cold_in_Mexico.htm

I love watching Domino effects! I have my pop corn right here!

The longer the “review” the more opportunity to involve the MSM’s “investigations” into AGW. How could the CRU emails possibly become a “settled” issue in the MSM? – by settling Jones, et al as credible and just. Rue that day. Let scrutinized science roar while it can and don’t give the “Reviewers” an opportunity to approve AGW Climategate.

How in the name of common sense can any politician even think about voting on massive re-engineering of society and wealth when the people who created this theory are now being investigated?
When exactly did we pass through the looking glass?

So Penn State will investigate Penn State professor Michael Mann, and UEA will investigate UEA-CRU director Phil Jones.
In related news the Obama administration will investigate president Obama, police have announced that all murder investigations will be turned over to criminal gangs, and black pots will investigate black kettles.

“Professor Jones said: “What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible.”
I couldn’t make it past there.
Anything good further down?…
JimB

CRU was leading the world, alright…right off the freakin’ CLIFF, and the other agencies were collecting checks and echoing/supporting each others research like a good group of lemmings.
I’ll raise a glass of good port to Anthony and Steve tonight.
JimB

So now it is time for Mann to man up.

Given Dr. Phil Jones brings so much money into the University this appears rather serious. After all… it isn’t as if the media has been hounding them day and night over his actions. Only the Internet has been abuzz over this.
I am going out on a limb here and say that there are more people who agree with the Guardian’s Monbiot on this matter than meets the eye. He called for Phil Jones to step down.

“Invariant (11:56:30) :
By all means, this is good news, but let us show that we also have a warm and human side here at WUWT – we all do mistakes!”
I can forgive mistakes, generally, unless someone was hurt…
What they’ve done for the past 10yrs is not a “mistake”…this is way beyond that. There is nothing innocent in destroying data, deleting emails, subverting peer review processes…those are not mistakes. They are far worse…
JimB

So, does this mean he has been uninvited to Hopenhagain? After all, he is Jones, Phil Jones of his magesty’s secret service of climat change who prefers his data shaken but not stirred. Apoligies to Ian and all 00 agents.

‘continue to operate normally’?
‘start’ he means

Now that is strange. The last one appeared ‘awaiting moderation’ but the one before did not and when I tried to re-submit it informed me that it was a duplicate yet it is not here? WordPress problems I guess??
not to worry.
[Sometimes posts wind up in spam for a variety of reasons. These don’t show up as “waiting for moderation” but we review them and often post them (but sometimes after some delay) ~ Evan]

The BBC, of course, has rushed to report this story. Well, actually… no. Instead they have a report which wonders why in the face of so much scientific evidence the public still don’t accept that there is such a thing as human-induced catastrophic global warming. They even have that well-known scientist Lord Stern telling us how stupid we are not to accept the evidence.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8389547.stm
This report tells us that “New evidence suggests sea levels could rise by 1.4m (by the end of the century) which would be a potential disaster for some countries.”
In another report, Craig Bennett tells us that “There’s money to be made in going green.” You’ll bet! But not in the way he means.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_8383000/8383547.stm

What are the odds that the BBC ignores this story?
After all the director of the world’s leading (?) climate research centre stepping aside because of suspicions of unethical behaviour… not that newsworthy really is it?

I actually feel a bit sorry for Phil Jones. He’s obviously a smart fellow, but what got him (and his climate cabal buddies) into trouble was *** hubris ***:
hubris (n): wanton insolence or arrogance resulting from excessive pride or from passion

‘Climate sceptics get it wrong’ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/6703841/Climate-sceptics-get-it-wrong.html?state=target#postacomment&postingId=6704272
Join in, there’s no need to register at the Telegraph website.

When is the rest of the data acquired legally or not from HCRU going to be released or posted somewhere? I’m sure that this same person or person’s has a lot more. I’m sure that the coverup has just begun. There are too many involved in this scheme to hide it all. We must quickly identify them and hit ’em with FOIA requests. I would start with Al Gore and Mr Hansen. The others are busy deleting files for which we probably have copies. Let them dig their own holes deeper before we handcuff them all.

JimB (12:45:38) : I can forgive mistakes, generally, unless someone was hurt… What they’ve done for the past 10yrs is not a “mistake”…
Sure – many mistakes. What annoys me the most is that they took full control of the peer review process; this is nasty, see excellent comment #14 below from a nuclear engineer. Still, it is always a danger that our “group think” here at WUWT becomes somewhat nasty too; although WUWT is certainly the most civilised climate blog!
“ClimateGate exposed the cabal of 20 – 30 scientists (not just at CRU) that peer reviewed each others papers, strong-armed scientific journals to only print their views, and then sat on the IPCC panels as authors judging which published studies go into the IPCC final reports. This is why they always keep shouting “peer reviewed studies, peer reviewed studies, peer reviewed studies”. They owned the peer review process.”
http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2009/11/28/climategate-time-to-postpone-copenhagen/

Perhaps another scientific “trick”?

Let’s guess the spin:
“It doesn’t matter…”

UEA is doing the CYA dance! But after this white wash is over Phil Jones will be reinstated with not even a slap on the wrist.

Jim Watson (12:00:38) :
Jim, I feel no glee. I’m sorry that so many people of good will have been so misled and mistreated. I’m sorry that so much money and time was wasted and that so much science has been tainted. I mourn the careers.
The silver lining is that I and millions like me have become much more intrested and engaged by science. Sure, skeptically, but what’s wrong with that?
And many, many folks now know that they need to keep an eye on the ivory tower. Learn about what they’re doing. Make sure they’re on the up and up.
And, lets not forget, many of us are a LOT more educated than we once were thanks to this fiasco. I’m glad for the knowledge.
M

Ocean biochemistry has been completely left out of climate models until this summer.
It’s the new hot thing.
So Liss might be a good choice since he’s an organic chemist with an oceanography background.
This could take proving them wrong to a whole new level.
Not just statistics any more.
Now if someone would just tell them that they need to add phosphorus with the iron to make it work.

One of the lessons from Sun Tsu, the downfall of the arrogant is always their arrogance. And running around yelling we are all going to melt at the top of their lungs is the height of arrogance.
So what will Obama do at Hopenhagen?

I believe a website with a clear comma fault IN THE HEADER. Yeah, I do.
ice9

I just read on Media Matters how they are claiming that nothing was destroyed, but yet it all looks like lying double talk. MM links to the NY Times, so I’m showing what CRU had said to the NY Times:
“When you’re looking at climate data, you don’t want stations that are showing urban warming trends,” Jones said, “so we’ve taken them out.” Most of the stations for which data was removed are located in areas where there were already dense monitoring networks, he added. “We rarely removed a station in a data-sparse region of the world.”
Refuting CEI’s claims of data-destruction, Jones said, “We haven’t destroyed anything. The data is still there — you can still get these stations from the [NOAA] National Climatic Data Center.”
Tom Karl, director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., noted that the conclusions of the IPCC reports are based on several data sets in addition to the CRU, including data from NOAA, NASA and the United Kingdom Met Office. Each of those data sets basically show identical multi-decadal trends, Karl said.
………………………………………………
It sounds like they are saying they didn’t delete anything because they got it all from the NOAA, while at the same time saying that they are different data sets that don’t precisely line up. This was said before Climategate hit the fan, but is now being repeated. I think there should be a clarification that CRU is not NOAA so CRU is lying and “basically” doesn’t count.

Jean (13:01:09) :
Who is Harry, of Harry-Read-Me fame?
Some say Ian Harris.

I do not think that Dr. Jones will be back as Director (tho will in all likliehood continue as a researcher/professor). The review will exonerate him on the science, and find some fault of leadership. . . whereupon Jones will seize upon the first and step aside permenantly as Director to “concentrate on his research” re the second.

Excellent, this is a watershed for the Climategate expose of bad climate science. Now it’s obvious that the ‘let’s ignore it and it will go away’ strategy isn’t doing the trick, they need a scapegoat to put the blame on.
There will be so much public scrutiny of this Independent CRU-Review that they cannot risk fudging the result or even more damage will be done to the already smeared UEA.
The next stage for UEA will be to sever all links with the CRU, as there is enough prima facie evidence in the Climategate files that many other CRU scientists where complicit in these sorry events.
Stand back everyone, the excrement is really going to hit the fan.

Maybe this is one of his “tricks”. Clever thing to do of course.
Sorry couldn’t help myself.

Has anybody seen this yet on Fox. Amazing.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/12/01/research-scandal-changed-views-global-warming/
YOU DECIDE
Thank you for voting!
Changed. I don’t believe any global warming research now, and think the conference should be canceled. 16% (7,649 votes)
Unchanged and still believe global warming research is accurate. 3% (1,627 votes)
Unchanged and still don’t believe global warming research is accurate. 80% (37,097 votes)
Don’t know. 1% (260 votes)
Total Votes: 46,633

The Canadian way…
Not only the Globe and Mail in Canada obfuscated the climategate news on their website, but now they try to intimidate me to even comment on the subject:
GlobeandMailgate is next!!!
—–Original Message—–
From: “Lxxxxxxxx
To: “xxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 15:48:56 -0500
Subject: Your comment on the globeandmail.com
> Please do not post the same comment on multiple stories. Also, please make sure that your comment is relevant to the story it is posted in.
>
> I’ve removed your three comments on Phil Jones stepping down. Two of them were posted on stories that had nothing to do with climate change. The third comment was on a relevant story, but for legal reasons, we can not allow you to reproduce large segments of an AP story on our comment board.
>
> In the future, if you want to draw attention to an ent on another site that is relevant to the story, a short summary and a link will work.
>
> Thank you,
>
> SxxxxLxxxx
> GlobeandMail.com
Considering the AP story was about 10 lines…

Hansen did an interview with Eric Berger of the Houston Chronicle (Hansen is speaking in Houston). More comments regarding nazism and slavery. Here’s the link (probably deserves its own topic heading).
http://blogs.chron.com/sciguy/archives/2009/12/james_hansen_the_interview_in_its_entirety.html#more

JimB (12:37:09) :
“Professor Jones said: “What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible.”
I couldn’t make it past there.
Me neither.
That’s usually where I tab out and run over to WUWT for instant brain rescue before I throw up.
Glen Beck would say, “That made blood shoot out of my EYES!”

re: Invariant (11:56:30) :
[citation]
By all means, this is good news, but let us show that we also have a warm and human side here at WUWT – we all do mistakes!
[/citation]
yep, but fortunately we have our good operators here, snipping it when it’s
way off appropriate. Poor ol’ sod Jones didn’t have one to correct him.

In Canada the Globe and Mail did not mention Climategate on their website. Yet the gatekeepers do not hesitate to intimidate in order to keep Climategate quiet:
Here is the emai I just received:
—–Original Message—–
From: “xxxxxx, Scott”
To: “xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 15:48:56 -0500
Subject: Your comment on the globeandmail.com
> Please do not post the same comment on multiple stories. Also, please make sure that your comment is relevant to the story it is posted in.
>
> I’ve removed your three comments on Phil Jones stepping down. Two of them were posted on stories that had nothing to do with climate change. The third comment was on a relevant story, but for legal reasons, we can not allow you to reproduce large segments of an AP story on our comment board.
>
> In the future, if you want to draw attention to an ent on another site that is relevant to the story, a short summary and a link will work.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Scott xxxxxxxx
> GlobeandMail.com
The AP article was 10 lines long…

[citation]
Vice-Chancellor Professor Edward Acton said: “I have accepted Professor Jones’s offer to stand aside during this period. It is an important step to ensure that CRU can continue to operate normally and the independent review can conduct its work into the allegations.
[/citation]
Hummh, speculation, did they get his offer by point of a gun, literally?
If yes, “Hasta la vista, baby”.

Spenc BC (13:42:08) :
Yes, and I voted in it.
And also this:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578368,00.html
Others have had the distinct displeasure of finding thier scientific questioning fall under the heels of the cabal.
The rebuttal at the end, well… not exactly a professional argument that one would expect from a scientist.

A victory, but a small one. I’m afraid that this will be all that comes from this scandal. I’m probably just being cynical, but the media is still trying to bury this story and they figure this will appease some people and make the story fade. I even checked google news for this story and it didn’t show up on the main news page. The suggestion fill in for had no auto suggest for “phil jones” no matter how many letters you put in.
The MSM is just sitting with their fingers in their ears chanting LA LA LA hoping for enough time to get the Compenhagen treaty done and Cap and Tax passed. We’re not reaching enough people to be effictive and, while I should be happy, I’m just getting more depressed. I guess feeling powerless to stop the insanity does that to you 🙁

So, finally there is some real acceptance of the light being shown upon this travesty:
BBC News: December 1, 2009
“It is also possible that the institutional innovation that has been the IPCC has now largely run its course.
Perhaps, through its structural tendency to politicise climate change science, it has helped to foster a more authoritarian and exclusive form of knowledge production – just at a time when a globalising and wired cosmopolitan culture is demanding of science something much more open and inclusive.”
Mike Hulme – School of Environmental Sciences at the U of East Anglia
Dr Jerome Ravetz, Institute for Science, Innovation and Society (InSIS) at Oxford University
We must not be afraid to point to the nefarious actions of the culpable academics. Nor their associates’ concerted attempt to use false science to extort funds from industrialized nations. The IPCC is smack in the center of this, confirming it is a purely political organization. As such it cannot and has not done science for the past twenty years. It is time to scrap the institution and start again. Without the pathetic injection of politics from either spectrum.

Sorry to talk Politics, but that is what this news is about …
“Stepping aside” is UK Public Sector-speak for “fired”, he wont be coming back. People at his level are rarely sacked outright, they are usually “invited to step down”
Whatever we may think here about the science issues, I’ll lay odds that is was the Information Commissioner investigation into the FOI stuff and the security breach that allowed internal emails to be leaked that did it.
For any senior public sector manager that sort of stuff is “throw the book at them” territory. The only suprise is that its taken them so long. My guess is pressure from Whitehall to try and keep the lid on it until after Copenhagen delayed it, but the viral spread of the story on the net had forced their hand.
Play the game of politics, and you have to live with the consequences when it goes pear shaped Im afraid.

Penn State student newspaper talks about an ‘inquiry’ regarding Mann:
http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2009/11/30/psu_investigates_climategate.aspx

Jones’ comments about the investigation gives me chills… he seems pretty self confident and it sounds like HE was the one asking for it?
Sounds like a whitewash for me… AARGH, someone put an END TO THIS MADNESS!

Nature report Phil Jones stepping down here: http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2009/12/director_of_east_anglia_climat.html
Maybe a good place for some of you scientists to initiate a debate and to put down comments for the scientific community to see?

In the eloquent word of Edmond Dantes:
“One”

BBC just repeated its article on the failure to convince the Brits of climate change. Nick Stern and Benny Peiser comment on it.
They say most governments accept the science but sceptics (Peiser) worry that we are rushing into a poor deision.
“Challenge is convincing the public it is really worth it.”
No mention of CRU or Jones. Seems that news takes time to filter through to the BBC newroom.

I came across this in the emails and I think LLNL needs to be investigated as well. This is from Ben Santer and if you look at this and other emails, you’ll see that Santer and CRU are part of their own private club:
“In my opinion, Steven McIntyre is the self-appointed Joe McCarthy of
climate science. I am unwilling to submit to this McCarthy-style
investigation of my scientific research. As you know, I have refused to
send McIntyre the ‘derived’ model data he requests, since all of the
primary model data necessary to replicate our results are freely
available to him. I will continue to refuse such data requests in the
future. Nor will I provide McIntyre with computer programs, email
correspondence, etc. I feel very strongly about these issues. We should
not be coerced by the scientific equivalent of a playground bully.”
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=934&filename=1226451442.txt
This guy at LLNL is paid by the taxpayer – it’s our property, not his! The FOIA isn’t for picking and choosing to only hand over taxpayer-paid data to the people you like. This whole worldwide crew feel like they’ve got their own fiefdoms with everyone else being peasants. These guys are government employees!

George Orwell has said that the biggest lies are lies of omission.
CNN and the rest of their MSM ilk who do not report on Climategate are the biggest liars. They lie constantly and everybody knows it.

Hopefully, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Keep fighting the good fight!!!

Alba (12:52:57) :
The BBC, of course, has rushed to report this story. Well, actually… no. Instead they have a report which wonders why in the face of so much scientific evidence the public still don’t accept that there is such a thing as human-induced catastrophic global warming.

Even better is this steaming pile of postmodernist apologetics:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8388485.stm

We argue that the evolving practice of science in the contemporary world must be different from the classic view of disinterested – almost robotic – humans establishing objective claims to universal truth…
The classic virtues of scientific objectivity, universality and disinterestedness can no longer be claimed to be automatically effective as the essential properties of scientific knowledge.

So apparently science no longer needs to be objective or empirical, since that might be politically inconvenient.

“Gary Crough (13:56:49) :
Scientists who had their work suppressed are not going to accept a whitewash. In addition, initial investigations will lead to investigations of others … this is the beginning of the end for the individuals who were driven mostly by politics rather than science. ”
I agree. I’ve seen risk adverse administrators take surprising actions once the spotlight was on them. Why should they take a fall for a renegade scientist?
I’d love to see someone start a boycott of universities which refuse to properly investigate their questionable scientists. The boycott should be advertised to parents of college bound students.
Penn State and University at Albany should be the first on the list. If just one of these universities does the right thing, it could start to snowball.

Jean (13:01:09) :

Who is Harry, of Harry-Read-Me fame?

Harry is the recipient, Ian ‘Harry’ Harris!
The writer I believe comments here!
DaveE.

What an idiotic sanction from UEA.
If i run over a person and he dies, do you think it’s enough to abandon my driver licence?
Confine those fudgers to prison, where they belong.

The print edition of the daily express UK are running climatgate on the front page tomorrow, shown on ITV news, tomorrows papers).

Maybe he’ll talk, turn states evidence like the Mafia used to do to save his skin!

KlausB (13:50:26): yep, but fortunately we have our good operators here
Indeed. We are fortunate with Anthony Watts and his team of reviewers. Really this is about honesty vs. dishonesty; it’s not an exaggeration to state that people here at WUWT are more interested and fascinated by science itself than trying to benefit anything from science.

[how did this anti semitic rant make it through the other moderators. Dudes! ~ ctm]

O/T:
Vukcevic mentioned the magnetic field in his post.
I saw a programme about magnetic polar flip and what they said was that prior to such an event the Earths magnetic field goes into flux.
The footage of a wobbly hole in the magnetic field above the northern hemosphere looked a lot like the wobbly hole which used to be shown in relation to the missing ozone layer.
I recently learned on another programme that ozone can be destroyed by sunlight when not protected by the Magnetic shield.
I never hear of our magnetic field or its fluctuations in any science to do with climate.
Is there a reason?
As I said before I flunked school so forgive me if it’s a stupid question.

A rather apt quote from Bertrand Russell:
‘What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires — desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way.’
Sums up warmist and sceptic points of view i think.

Can’t believe that you media hotshots have not found the BBC report of Phil Jones’ stepping aside! Just go to the BBC main web page; then look for the UK news, then find the ‘England’ section, then look at the drop down bar for the regional news, and scroll down until you find ‘Norfolk’.
Where else would they put a story of international significance?
Just to make it easy for y’all
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/8389727.stm

Follow the money!
———————-
From Phillip Stott’s blog, http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/Clamour_Of_The_Times/Clamour_Of_The_Times/Entries/2009/12/1_Can_You_Believe_It_Alleged_Carbon_Fraud_in…Denmark.html
Can You Believe It? Alleged Carbon Fraud in…Denmark
Tuesday, 1 December 2009
“Do not, as some ungracious pastors do,/ Show me the steep and thorny way to heaven,/ Whiles, like a puff’d and reckless libertine, Himself the primrose path of dalliance treads./ And recks not his own rede.” [Ophelia, Act I, Scene III, ‘The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark’. Photo: wind turbines off Copenhagen, by Leonard G., reproduced here under the Creative Commons ShareAlike License 1.0]
First, there were those infamous hacked e-mails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia. Now, a mere seven days before the Copenhagen Conference on climate change, this breaking news story takes the breath away. The whole ‘global warming’ shambles is falling apart. Today, The Copenhagen Post declares: “Denmark Rife With CO2 Fraud”:
“Denmark is the centre of a comprehensive tax scam involving CO2 quotas, in which the cheats exploit a so-called ‘VAT carrousel’, reports Ekstra Bladet newspaper.
Police and authorities in several European countries are investigating scams worth billions of kroner, which all originate in the Danish quota register. The CO2 quotas are traded in other EU countries.”
And the fraud may be of massive proportions:
“Ekstra Bladet reporters have found examples of people using false addresses and companies that are in liquidation, which haven’t been removed from the register.
One of the cases, which stems from the Danish register, involves fraud of more than 8 billion kroner. This case, in which nine people have been arrested, is being investigated in England.”
What can one say?
We all knew from the start that carbon trading could prove, by its very nature, a crooks’ charter. But such an allegation relating to Denmark, of all places, at the precise moment of the Copenhagen Conference, where such cap-and-trade measures will be at the forefront of debate, must have the Little Mermaid crying so much that sea-levels may indeed rise.
Simply staggering! How long can this ‘global warming’ nonsense be tolerated? I’m off for a strong, wee dram.

This evening (UK time) I was in an IM conversation with three good friends of mine about an entirely unrelated subject (classic and almost-classic cars). My friends are Professors, in engineering (2) and orthopaedics (1).
The topic of Phil Jones came up when news of his “stepping aside” broke.
All three Professors agreed that he’s committed academic suicide. There is no way back into Academia for him. Ever.
Remember that this is happening in England. Our society might be ravaged by a socialist government but certain standards are still maintained, especially by honest gentlemen.

Perhaps a Whitewash wouldn’t be such a bad thing!
When Nobel prize winner Steven Chu suggested that we could solve gw by painting buildings white, he was excoriated by Viscount Moncton. Not for the science, of course, our blue-blooded Christopher knows all about the effects of an increased albedo, but by ruthless use of “those pesky numbers” as John Brignell host of that most excellent site numberwatch.co.uk might say.
In simple terms using paint was economically unviable!
Whitewash, OTOH may be just the ticket. It reflects light well, it is cheaper to manufacture than paint, mostly harmless, easy to apply but, most importantly, has a high Carbon content.
In other words Whitewatch is a Carbon sink sans pareil!!!!
Not only will it suck up Carbon from fossil fuel energy generation but it will
make Steven Chu a happy man!
Da*n it, give Phil a big brush, a bucket of Whitewash and he can look forward to years of gainful employment saving the Planet, supplementing his pension and chewing the fat with his old buddies!
Now Watts Up With That?

“Does anybody here know if UEA has any administrators with guts?”
“Anything good further down?…”
Several of you said you couldn’t make it any further, perhaps you should have!
Here’s a few snippets from the UEA’s press release linked at the top.
“The publication of a selection of the emails and data stolen from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) has led to some questioning of the climate science research published by CRU and others. There is nothing in the stolen material which indicates that peer-reviewed publications by CRU, and others, on the nature of global warming and related climate change are not of the highest-quality of scientific investigation and interpretation. CRU’s peer-reviewed publications are consistent with, and have contributed to, the overwhelming scientific consensus that the climate is being strongly influenced by human activity.”
“The publication of a selection of stolen data is the latest example of a sustained and, in some instances, a vexatious campaign”
“One has to wonder if it is a coincidence that this email correspondence has been stolen and published at this time. This may be a concerted attempt to put a question mark over the science of climate change in the run-up to the Copenhagen talks.”
“A selection of these emails have been taken out of context and misinterpreted as evidence that CRU has manipulated climate data to present an unrealistic picture of global warming.”
Go on – scroll down and see that absolutely nothing has changed at the UEA.
The local paper still hasn’t given it more than the briefest of mentions. They now have former M.P, and pro warmist, Ian Gibson writing for them – a coincidence?

Professor Jones’s comment on the BBC website:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/norfolk/8389727.stm
At the time that the theft of the data was revealed climate sceptics picked up on the word “trick” in one e-mail from 1999 and talk of “hiding the decline”.
Professor Jones said the e-mail was genuine but taken “completely out of context”.
He released a copy of the actual e-email which reads: “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) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”
Professor Jones said: “The first thing to point out is that this refers to one diagram – not a scientific paper.
SOME DIAGRAM!!