From a University of East Anglia Press Release
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.”
An AP story is here
h/t to Jeff Id of The Air Vent
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I hope “the Review process” wont be a whitewash
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
Surely this cannot be kept out of the mainstream press, which means climategate becomes public with national and international syndication!
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.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j_dt9Bjj5yVV7k1PAyDnVHKvKtgAD9CAM0VG0
google repro of AP story
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.
….just hide the step down Phil.
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.
Meh, probably just giving him some time off so he can head to Copehagen.
I’ll believe it is a serious investigation when I see it.
I couldn’t help myself, I posted DEMOLITION at RC too. 😉
Independent like peer-review independent, or independent as in actually looking for the truth independent?
Will it be an open review, or confidential (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/01/climategate-grows-to-include-other-research-institutions/)?
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!
We don’t all behave unethically though.
Does anyone think the UN IPCC is good for anything now but ridicule?
Couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy. I certainly hope that the people conducting the review aren’t kow-towing stooges.
If the University is genuinely concerned about the credibility of their Climate Research Unit then they have to make them publish the original data and the computer constructs that they have used to create their global temperature history.
Of course we know that this isn’t possible because they accidentally pressed the delete key!? (From a sceptical teacher)
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.
“What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading [war against all the slimy charlatans of the world] research with as little interruption and diversion as possible. After a good deal of consideration [and meditation on the Global Right-wing, Nixonian conspirators] I have decided [Mike, Kevin, Tom… Did you burn the e-mails yet?] that the best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the Director’s [a horse, a horse, my Kingdom for a horse!] role during the course of the independent review and am grateful to the University for agreeing to this.
[Shred my memoirs while you’re at it.]
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.
Oh, and we now know what they’re going to do with the whitewash that was supposed to have been put on the Stevenson Screens.
Will Steve M. be asked to be on the review panel?
This just in: The independent review board will consist of Al Gore, James Hansen, Gavin Schmidt, Nicholas Stern, and Rajenda Pachauri.
tallbloke (11:51:33) :
Meet the new boss…
http://www.uea.ac.uk/env/people/facstaff/lissp
“ The idea that gases produced by plankton living in the oceans can affect cloudiness and regulate climate was given prominence by the promulgation more than 20 years ago by Charlson, Lovelock, Andreae and Warren of the CLAW hypothesis. In the intervening period it has been difficult to prove or disprove the idea, although much research has flowed from its enunciation. Perhaps its lasting legacy is in the way we view the planet and how research is conducted to try to understand how it operates.”
The man is obviously thinking outside the box!
Some 5 years ago I wrote:
Large amount of CO2 is released by the world’s oceans; they are also large absorbers. It should not be assumed that both sides of this process are always in an equilibrium. The release of CO2 is not, but its absorption may be affected by the Sun.
Increased UV and gamma radiation are reaching the oceans’ surface during periods of high sunspot activity. There are also charged particles emanating either from solar or galactic activity. All of these to a certain degree damage living cells. UV and gamma radiation have caused increase in skin cancers, while charged particles can have disastrous effect on communications, power grids, satellites and astronauts working in space etc. Clouds provide protection from UV rays, Van-Allen belt provides partial protection from charged particles.
When solar activity is on increase (as it has been since 1860-s) then amount of all 3 kinds of radiation would be increasing. Coincidently, the strength of the Earth’s magnetic field has been decaying during same period (61 to 54 micro Tesla) by about 11%, so radiation protection of Van-Allen belt has also been reduced.
Increase of the harmful radiation is causing reduction in bio-mass of the oceans’ surface phytoplankton, possibly the largest absorber of CO2 on the Earth’s surface, either through direct destruction of its cells or a process of sterilization by irradiation. Result of this is a reduced uptake of CO2. There are already quantifiable evaluations of reduction in the efficiency of phytoplankton. Reverse process takes place during reductions in the solar activity causing global cooling end may even caused LIA (solar activity was at a minimum between 1645 and1710 causing considerable cooling known as the ‘Little Ice Age’).
Apparent is a also a link between strength of geomagnetic field and climatic variation on a medium term scale.
I don’t like gloating at someone else’s misfortune, but the CRU e-mails are damning.
Jones et al. have conspired to suppress and delete information that was subject to freedom of information requests. They have sought to fix data around a predetermined policy of pro-global warming activism. And they have sought to suppress dissenting scientific opinion.
I don’t see how Jones can come back again. And I think he will be just the first domino to fall.
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..
“What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible. ”
Read as. We must keep that decline hidden at all costs.
For the honest people.
What is most important is that CRU is wound up and all coruupted studies that were based on the fraudulent data are also scrapped.