UPDATE: I’ve confirmed this document, see below the “read more” line.
It appears bigger things are brewing related to CRU’s Climategate.
WUWT commenter J.C. writes in comments:
I work at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. I’ve been following the Climategate scandal since its inception. The first time many of my coworkers had heard of the situation was when I asked them about it.
Well, well, well.
Look what was waiting in every single email Inbox on Monday morning:
______________________________________________
“December 14, 2009
DOE Litigation Hold Notice
DOE-SR has received a “Litigation Hold Notice” from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) General Council and the DOE Office of Inspector General regarding the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England. Accordingly, they are requesting that SRNS, SRR and other Site contractors locate and preserve all documents, records, data, correspondence, notes, and other materials, whether official or unofficial, original or duplicative, drafts or final versions, partial or complete that may relate to the global warming, including, but not limited to, the contract files, any related correspondence files, and any records, including emails or other correspondence, notes, documents, or other material related to this contract, regardless of its location or medium on which it is stored. In other words, please preserve any and all documents relevant to “global warming, the Climate Research Unit at he University of East Anglia In England, and/or climate change science.”
As a reminder, this Litigation Hold preservation obligation supersedes any existing statutory or regulatory document retention period or destructive schedule. The determination of what information may be potentially relevant is based upon content and substance and generally does not depend on the type of medium on which the information exists. The information requested may exist in various forms, including paper records, hand-written notes, telephone log entries, email, and other electronic communication (including voicemail), word processing documents (including drafts, spreadsheets, databases, and calendars), telephone logs, electronic address books, PDAs (like Palm Pilots and Blackberries), internet usage files, systems manuals, and network access information in their original format. All ESI should be preserved in its originally-created, or “native” format, along with related metadata. Relevant backup tapes and all indexes for those tapes should also be preserved. Further, information that is reasonably accessible must nonetheless be preserved, because such sources will, at the very least, need to be identified and, under compelling circumstances, may need to be produced.
If you have any doubts as to whether specific information is responsive, err on the side of preserving that information.
Any employee who has information covered by this Litigation Hold is requested to contact Madeline Screven, Paralegal, SRNS Office of General Council, 5-4634, for additional instructions.
Michael L. Wamsted
Associate General Council”
_______________________________________________
Everyone on-site who has an email account received this letter. That’s somewhere in the neighborhood of 8000 people. How about that? And this is the first official mention of the entire subject that I have seen.
DOE-SR = Department of Energy Savannah River
SRNS = Savannah River Nuclear Solutions
SRR = Savannah River Remediation
NOTE: Some commenters raised some doubts about the authenticity of this email.
I checked out a couple of things before I posted this. The IP address of J.C. comes from the correct location in South Carolina, Aiken, and the name Michael L. Wamsted does work for DOE at the SRS in SC in legal. See http://phonebook.doe.gov/
Also the existence of the paralegal “Madeline Screven” listed in the email (whom I believe composed it) is listed in the DOE phonebook search of “Screven” and is listed in the same building as Wamsted.
The “Council -vs- Counsel” spelling error could be something as simple as a spell checker substituting the wrong word, or just a dumb mistake when composing email where the spell checker would not flag “council” as it is spelled correctly. Heck, I misspell “meteorologist” sometimes in correspondence, dropping an “o”. I have had a situation sometimes where “metrologist” (also valid) gets substituted on spell check. Spelling mistakes, compounded with spell checker substitution errors – they happen. I have one computer (the one I’m typing on) that always switches the word “because” to “becuase” in spell checks for some odd reason, and I can’t figure out how to correct it. So I live with it and try to manually fix it when I notice it. There is another spelling error “Climate Research Unit at he University”. Which is a mistake I make from time to time, missing the “t” on the. Spell checkers don’t catch that one, since “he” is a correctly spelled word.
If the IP had not come from Aiken, SC where Savannah River Site and lab is, I would be highly suspect of it. But the IP address in Aiken and the names check out. Aiken is right next to SRS.
See the doc and map for directions here: http://www.srs.gov/general/about/directions_aiken.pdf
The language used also checks out, it has been reviewed by an attorney who frequents WUWT and he raised no red flags. Steve McIntyre points out that Dr. Jones got funding from DOE (of which SRS is part of). The different pieces connect pretty well and I don’t have a reason to doubt this memo sent via email today. – Anthony
======================
UPDATE: 12/15/12:36 PST
I called SRS Legal office just now and spoke with Madeline Screven, who is listed as a paralegal in the letter I posted. I found her telephone number via the DOE phonebook.
When I called, she fully identified herself in her greeting to me, I explained who I was, giving my full name. She asked if I was “on or off site” referring to SRS. I explained I’m off-site.
My question: “Do you have a litigation hold notice related to the Climate Research Unit.”
Her answer: “Yes we do”
Confirmed.
Sorry, meant “top law firms (plural) in the country”.
In the final analysis, national borders aren’t going to hinder anything for long. If the US government determines Jones or Wigley possibly committed crimes as contractors, then that is a whole nother level of legal ball game, they’d get extradited from Britain pretty easily unless the British gov’t is so batty as to make a stink over it, which I doubt. If Brown refused an extradition request over this, it could easily trigger a vote of no confidence in Parliament and bring down his government.
Theres no death penalty over defrauding the taxpayer or scientific fraud, so theres really no legal basis for Brown to refuse extradition if it came to that, unless he intended to try them first for similar offenses in the UK.
Anton (09:03:09) :
It’s the Climactic Research Unit, not the Climate Research Unit. Can an incorrect name invalidate the order?
Is this the new name adopted by the CRU crew while they’ve been checking out the free hookers in Copenhagen?
If this be true, then the DOE was only a week or two later than the press in acknowledging climategate, and now really wants to save the data a month after the fact.
It certainly sounds like a government beauracracy. Probably the real McCoy!
I called SRS Legal office just now and spoke with Madeline Screven, who is listed as a paralegal in the letter I posted. I found her telephone number via the DOE phonebook.
http://phonebook.doe.gov/
When I called, she fully identified herself in her greeting to me, I explained who I was, giving my full name. She asked if I was “on or off site” referring to SRS. I explained I’m off-site.
My question: “Do you have a litigation hold notice related to the Climate Research Unit.”
Her answer: “Yes we do”
Confirmed.
Just saw the update above:
“UPDATE: 12/15/12:36 PST
I called SRS Legal office just now and spoke with Madeline Screven, who is listed as a paralegal in the letter I posted. I found her telephone number via the DOE phonebook.
http://phonebook.doe.gov/
When I called, she fully identified herself in her greeting to me, I explained who I was, giving my full name. She asked if I was “on or off site” referring to SRS. I explained I’m off-site.
My question: “Do you have A litigation hold notice related to the Climate Research Unit.”
Her answer: “Yes we do”
Confirmed.”
Excellent….and thanks for going the extra mile. Your work is appreciated….
Well done, Anthony. Initial judgement vindicated.
Must have been a little worrying in the meantime though 🙂
“switches the word “because” to “becuase” in spell checks for some odd reason…”
(Off Topic) but if it helps you can edit the user spelling file in some versions of MSWord and correct wrongly added words such as “becuase” above. The error occurs because you must have hit “add word” when it flagged up the mispelling at some stage instead of correcting it.
Delete “becuase” in the spelling check user file and the problem should disappear.
REPLY: its not Word, but in the OS somewhere. -A
“I have one computer (the one I’m typing on) that always switches the word “because” to “becuase” in spell checks for some odd reason, and I can’t figure out how to correct it.”
If you are using Word 2003, SP1, drill down to the dictionary using Tools [menu], Spelling and Grammar [pulldown], Options [button], Custom Dictionaries [button], Modify [button]. Then edit the word that is incorrect.
Ditto Maxx
When I first saw this article on WUWT this morning, it warmed the cockles of my Gaia-hating, black, little heart. I was somewhat discomfited by the astute observations re. spelling of Counsel and Climate/Climatic. But Antony has done grand work in going right to the source.
Thanks
“UPDATE: 12/15/12:36 PST
I called SRS Legal office just now and spoke with Madeline Screven, who is listed as a paralegal in the letter I posted. I found her telephone number via the DOE phonebook.
http://phonebook.doe.gov/
When I called, she fully identified herself in her greeting to me, I explained who I was, giving my full name. She asked if I was “on or off site” referring to SRS. I explained I’m off-site.
My question: “Do you have A litigation hold notice related to the Climate Research Unit.”
Her answer: “Yes we do”
Confirmed.”
Like a poster above said, “The blood is in the water.” I think what we will see now is deafening crash as every politico in the country begins to divest himself of any percieved belief in AGW.
God help them, because the Fed won’t……
” If the US government determines Jones or Wigley possibly committed crimes as contractor. . .”
Here’s another “if” that nobody has considered. What if the actors in this drama are eventually exonerated of all accusations? That’s right. It will be open season on sceptics once again as the full fury and might of all these players – the media machine, NGO’s, politicians, and the scientists themselves – will be unleashed.
Make no mistake, the media will quickly paint all sceptics as villains of the drama. They will show how they were right all along – nothing to see here. They will show how sceptics have run a vindictive campaign of harassment against a small group of honest and diligent scientists all based on lies.
This is the worst case scenario, but It is entirely possible. Let us be carefull of what we wish for.
>> The BBC (Biased Broadcasting Corporation)
>> In other words they have broken every rule in the BBC rule book.
No, no, no – they rewrote the book.
Quote:
“”The BBC has held a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts, and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus.””
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/review_report_research/impartiality_21century/report.pdf
BTW I like the title: ‘BBC Trust’.
An oxymoron if I ever heard one.
.
It may have been confirmed that the DOE has a litigation hold in relation to CRU documents, and if so that is great news, but, as a government attorney for over 25 years, I can tell you that no attorney identifies himself on his signature line as “Associate General Council,” no matter how poor a speller he is. I would want to see the actual notice to confirm this one.
wattsupwiththat is still the only source I can find.
(Ebay has a blog with it.!)
“Confirmed.”
Whew!
PS: Someone should call them back and ask how they made those two suspicious mistakes.
And shouldn’t that be SN R S?
On 11/26 I wrote an e-mail to request an investigation of Dr. Mann and sent it to my state representative, my state senator and governor Rendell. I’m glad to see I’m not the only one.
jtwigge (08:54:34) : I think Richard Blacks latest post at http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/richardblack/2009/12/cop15_questions_about_sex.html deserves a barrage of complaints. He really is getting desperate.
This is my comment on his blog (until it gets erased):
Richard do you understand what it is to be a “fascist”?
A “fascist” is authoritarian and dictatorial. “Fascists” have such strong ideological convictions that they cannot understand opposing views and will not tolerate them. Traditionally “fascists” have sought ways to remove the rights of people who disagree with them – this can be done on the basis of religion, nationality, mental conditions, race or even gender, for example.
The ideological arguments start out from a point of view that there is something wrong with those people holding a conflicting viewpoint. It then follows that these people with conflicting views are either mentally retarded or stupid and need some forced “education” until they accept the truth or else these people need to be removed from society for the sake of society: The end justifies the means.
It is not too late to save yourself from pursuing this line of thinking and the very deep hole you appear to be digging.
It is shameful and distasteful of Lord Monckton to use the words “Hitler Youth” to describe zealous “anthropogenic” climate warming ideologues – but what is worse is that Lord Monckton was not so very far from the truth. Clearly, some of the “antropogenic” ideologues have become so polarized in their views that they cannot accept that the science is very far from “settled” nor can they accept that the majority of people disagree with them about the urgency for extremely wasteful and costly actions to dramatically curb man-made CO2 – actions that would cause hunger & poverty on an unprecedented scale.
Changing scenarios. Who will the culprit be in this new one?
Should not every institution that recieves public funds in regards to so called climate and C02 research referencing information from the CRU have their funding stopped? At least while the investigation of CRU is ongoing.
One step closer to what I think should be happening – namely criminal charges and prison for those corrupt climate scientists. Next, so called leaders such as Obama and Rudd to be thrown out of office. Al Gore in particular will no doubt one day suffer the same fate as Bernard Madoff. It’s all just a matter of time.
REPLY: Whoa! Getting ahead of it here. Investigations have not yet been completed, that is if you don’t count AP’s embarassing self vindication. Such statements about criminal charges are premature, and I’m going to start snipping any further ones like this. – Anthony
Here’s a better look at my statement about who owns the mainstream media.
Bilderberg Group Exposed on the History Channel
peter (13:42:44) :….what about their sponsors?
Great news for us ‘Naturalist’ climate buffs.
The political climate cooled when our climate failed to produce the ‘CAGW’ symptoms we’d been told to expect:-
No catastrophic sea-ice loss.
Glaciers survive.
No temperature change for last 10 years, as measured by more accurate satellite system.
No massive rise in sea levels.
Hurricane seasons weaken.
Polar bear colonies thrive.
Depite the constant media propaganda barrage, even true believers were starting to feel concerned.
So politicians globally needed to save face, or be destroyed by this falsified theory. What better scape-goats than the ‘scientists’ at CRU at UEA. They were the ones set up to prove the myth and it would be seen as poetic justice that they should take the blame. So perhaps it wasn’t a whistle blower or a Russian hack at all and we should be looking closer to home – MI6 or GCHQ anyone?