Odd things are going on at the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.
Widely available data, existing in the public view for years, is now disappearing from public view.
For example this link to Keith Briffa’s Yamal data:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/yamal2009/
Now redirects to a generic page of UEA. Try it yourself.
Now here is what that page says:
Climatic Research Unit
Due to the present high volume of visitors to this page, you will shortly be directed to the latest news about CRU on the main University of East Anglia website, or you can go there immediately by clicking on this link.
The cached page at Google is still available here, though none of the links to data or papers works there either.
I’ll point out that if indeed “traffic” is a concern, redirecting to another page on the UEA server system doesn’t do much for the load, it just moves it around. The data files are mostly text, and not that large, they don’t have that much more impact that some wab pages with graphics.
The news page that you get redirected to hasn’t much to say, and has not been updated since December 3rd.
And it’s not just subfolders with data, it is the entire Climate Research Unit website that is shielded from public view. Try the main link which has been functional for years:
In the last press release issued by UEA we read:
Professor Edward Acton, Vice-Chancellor said: “The reputation and integrity of UEA is of the upmost importance to us all.
So now apparently, in this newly pledged period of “openness and transparency”, with the promise of releasing new data access, such as the Met office has done here:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/science/monitoring/subsets.html
The access to important CRU data is simply denied?
That’s a hell of a way to build public trust.
Sponsored IT training links:
If you are not satisfied with 156-215.70 exam preparation then join 310-202 online training and complete LX0-101 certification in days guaranteed.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Bottom line is that we don’t know why this has happened. The appropriate response is to inquire of the University and CRU for their explanation. That should not be very hard for some enterprising journalist. Until then speculations only increase the probability of looking silly.
If google no longer works, the caches will still be available (briefly).
If there is anything you haven’t downloaded, saved, copied, I hope you are all doing that ASAP before it potentially vanishes for good.
I tried accessing everything CRU, and it all redirects to that pointless page. Every other faculty member, every PR page from CRU– if it’s associated with CRU, it’s currently OOC.
I just think that the enormity of the fraud is just starting to sink in.
Anyone with Vast knowledge of Climategate, who would like to Argue an Alarmist into the Ground,…I would appreciate all the Help I can get 😉
Website is http://floridastate.rivals.com/forum.asp?sid=1061&fid=1078&style=2
It is a Football website,…that has it’s own Political board for political information only….
Any and all welcome….
Maybe they’re just trying to “hide the decline” of their credibility?
I notice that WayBack has no records saved for 2009 – was this because it was based on server records rather than webpages or something else?
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/
RichieP @ur momisugly 07:36:45…
The link worked OK for me a couple of minutes ago (16:15z)
RichieP (07:36:45) :
Neil Jones: “Nigel Calder, former editor of New Scientist, says the orthodoxy must be challenged”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1363818.ece”
Either your link’s wrongly copied or the article’s been removed. I wonder which??
No, article is still there…
Either your link’s wrongly copied…
Worked for me (twice) – note that teh article is datelined 2007; this isn’t a new statement by Calder.
@wws (07:08:53)
I think you’ve got it right. Briffa may have done it.
The response?
“Hide the decline” again and again.
RichieP (07:36:45) :
Neil Jones: “Nigel Calder, former editor of New Scientist, says the orthodoxy must be challenged”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1363818.ece”
Either your link’s wrongly copied or the article’s been removed. I wonder which??
Neither – it works just fine. The problem is at your end.
Oh dear – follow the money and…
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100019821/climategate-with-business-interests-like-these-are-we-really-sure-dr-rajendra-pachauri-is-fit-to-head-the-ipcc/
RichieP (07:36:45) said :
Hmmm, worked for me. WUWT?
Still there – I just googled for the phrase
“Nigel Calder, former editor of New Scientist, says the orthodoxy must be challenged”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1363818.ece
It makes sense that the person who did this was an insider -who at first tried to go to the BBC (If I recall the story correctly), apparently unaware that the MSM wouldn’t report anything that didn’t support AGW. This person probably wasn’t a skeptic- based on who they shared the information with first. It was a sympathizer, reluctant to act against the cause. Whoever it was, they should be commended, not vilified. Now if that person will just find the courage to come forward with the whole story.
RichieP (07:36:45)
remove the ” at the end of .ece
it doesn’t matter if its from 2007. Scienttific veracity doesn’t change according to time periods, although if new evidence throws doubt on a proposition then there are grounds to question a hypothesis.
In physics nowadays – especially radiative physics, not least of those that pertain to the climate, there are many absurd propositions that remain unchallenged. Its become an esoterical study due mainly to its lack of accountability. In biology this absurdity doesn’t pass muster, due to the fact that life depends on verifiable propositions.
I am waiting for…
“We cannot explain the website going down, and it is a travesty that we can’t.”
I was attempting to find documents relating to Jones’ statement in one of his emails (1255298593.txt) that the original data wasn’t actually destroyed, and could be reconstructed from work he did with the Department of Energy in the mid 80’s . All the documents listed on google scholar that linked to CRU were offline, and that was 5 days ago.
Perhaps someone could call up the IT department at CRU, ask for an engineer or admin, and have the issue explained? Perhaps try to have the relevant parts restored, if there are no legal issues?
As to the original data, I ran into roadblocks with the CRU site, DoE, and the Smithsonian Institution (may not be pertinent), and had to move on to other issues for the time being. I did find the following, however:
Jones, Wigley and Wright article in Nature circa 1986 – Global temperature variations between 1861 and 1984:
“Recent homogenized near-surface temperatures over the land and oceans of both hemispheres during the past 130 years are combined to produce the first comprehensive estimates of global mean temperature. The results show little trend in the nineteenth century, marked warming to 1940, relatively steady conditions to the mid-1970s and a subsequent rapid warming. The warmest 3 years have all occurred in the 1980s.”
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v322/n6078/pdf/322430a0.pdf
Didn’t The Met Office say it would be taking CRU and Hadley data off line for 3 years or something to perform a complete review?
Maybe this is just them complying with a Met Office order?
Maybe the same evil thieves that have been targeting Andrew Weaver at U Victoria have finished their evil work there and have moved to UEA.
Any Black Helicopters hovering over the CRU ?
Has the UEA Dept of Anthropology had any break-ins as well . . could be a repeat pattern
http://climateaudit.org/2009/12/10/new-kgb-fossil-fuel-company-attack-at-uvic/
The Great Gordon Brown saviour of the financial and warming world arrives at COP15
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_MXByb84VSgE/SyZlVKQ4UvI/AAAAAAAACxM/SQ12HnALGx4/s1600-h/article-1235481-0796520E000005DC-96_306x816.jpg
Guys…. this is standard practice for them … deleting data is nothing new. There is nothing to see here folks… move along … what fake data, show us where.
Watt & McIntyre – 21st Century Woodward & bernstein?
http://blackswhitewash.com/2009/12/14/we-need-a-woodward-bernstein-the-mail-leads-and-implicates-the-bbc-in-collusion/
To RichieP. The timesonline link is fine but has an extraneous quote following. Firefox simply discards it. Apparently your browser doesn’t so you’ll have to do it manually.