Now that we all have time to take a breath from the whirlwind of Climategate, Copenhagen, and the Christmas/New Year holiday, Steve McIntyre has written up a timeline on how the Climategate emails came to be public knowledge on the climate blogs.
Titled The Mosher Timeline, for our well known and frequent commenter Steven Mosher, it ties all of the blogs together that received the Russian FTP server link to the FOIA2009.zip file as a comment from the person(s) who leaked the file.
There are familiar but disassociated bits of knowledge tied together with new information to create a complete picture.
It is well worth the read, here.
For those who didn’t know, our own Charles The Moderator figured greatly in this timeline, props to him.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’ll write up a few of the last details in a post tonight or tomorrow.
“And you get to see what they really say behind the curtain.. you get to see how they “shape” the news, how they struggled between telling the truth and making policy makers happy.”
I just grabbed this quote from a CA reader, and thought it appropriate. Exposing how the elite manipulate the news we read and hear is part of the cleansing of Climategate. Power, concentrated in the hands of so few, with no oversight or balancing countermand – is a danger to the public it purportedly serves. The Climategate emails confirm that a very small band of like-minded fanatics have an ability to manipulate public perception. This used to pass muster a hundred years ago. Today, however, is a different world. We have access to the underlying knowledge. And when you pervert that knowledge – we can see it.
What remains is for the perpetraitors of the climate change debacle to come forward and confess their wrongs. Only then will the air clear and progress toward honest science begin.
Whomever Deepthroat was/is, that email timeline was a lot of work. There is no way a hacker could get into CRU and out within a short time and come up with the flow that is depicted in the emails.
It came from the inside, for it had to be someone very familiar with all the data and email exchanges.
So, what type of person on the inside could it be?
Disgruntled employee, demeaned cohort, adminstrator, or even someone who was a plant. But, whomever it was spent a good amount of time there, and knew who the players were and how they did busienss, where to find things.
Deepthroat could even be a CRU dean or board member, if they have those over there. A high-up intelligence agency in the US or UK could have also been looking into the doings that so much money and trading was being based upon wanted to know what the real risks were. Those data-mining taps supposedly at key nodes in the Internet would have a mountain of things to nail the CRU bad boys with.
If on the upper levels that would perch over or monitor CRU crew doings, we may never know.
just finished reading this at Climateaudit, great catch CTM!
Dr. Costella says to pass this along so i am.
http://assassinationscience.com/climategate/
Between the story at the Big Journalism site and the timeline presented at CA, it makes the background of Climategate even more fascinating, knowing all that went into the final release of all those OMG! moments.
This is great stuff! Mosher is a key element in this, & may even know who the leak is!
OT but interesting as part of the general malaise from the BBC. Last night on BBC 1’s magazine show “The One Show”, Historian Dan Snow (honest) did a little piece linked to the current cold spell reciting much colder times in the “Little Ice Age” 400 years ago. Of course this was limited to have affected only “part” of Europe at the time, but nevertheless, it’s a step in the right direction. No explanation as to why etc. Just can’t work out what the BBC is playing at, at the moment. It is so duplicitous. Are they really just hedging their bets?
Heavily OT, but I need a help from an English native. I am now proofreading my article on the Climategate, to be published in mid-February, in Japanese language, where the proper names should be written, in letters quite strange to you folks, in accordance to their pronunciation. One name I’m not certain about is “Saiers”. Is its pronunciation close to that of “say” + “-ers”, or ?
Thanks.
Interesting so that is where Mosher got the CD he mentions. Charles gave it to him after checking out a held comment. Very good and very smart to research the claims before jumping in and saying anything.
I mentioned this in the Climate Audit but since WUWT was involved it is worth asking here as well.
WUWT crossposted several pieces by Steve McIntyre regarding a mole within the CRU.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/07/26/deep-cool-the-mole-within-hadley-cru/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/07/28/hadley-cru-discovers-the-mole/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/08/01/publicly-available-data-being-purged-at-uks-hadley-climate-center/
I note that Anthony Watts claimed to know the identity of the mole. Are the leaks back in July related to the Climategate leak in anyway? I have been quite surprised that there has not been any reference to the leaks from the CRU back in July, even if they are not related.
REPLY: You missed the joke, the “mole” was CRU’s own incompetence, they left the file out in the open. The mole was whoever left it there. Steve McIntyre can confirm this, as can Steve Mosher. We were all just having a bit of fun with CRU until they figured out their own blunder, and when they did, they started erasing all sorts of public data on the FTP server
http://climateaudit.org/2009/07/31/the-cru-data-purge-continues/
– Anthony
No Need to Publish.
Note to monitors. You have introduced a great number of stories tonight. They arrive smoothly without delays or interruption. Hats off to your excellent work to keep WUWT running smoothly.
You are a part of something momentous as far as earth is concerned. We are grateful for your efforts.
Here’s a good late night George Noory story that just happened to me. I just figured this out. The good part is at the bottom where the screen shot link is. Here’s where the story originated, with this comment response that led me to figured it out. My language is a little bad, and if the moderator wants to delete it, I’ll understand.
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/120690
Time to Pop the Safety Bubble
ViewEdit
Submitted by michaelwise on Wed, 01/06/2010 – 20:19
in Daily Paul Liberty Forum
The MSM is trying to whip everyone into a massive hysterical frenzy over underwear and safety. Keep me safe, keep me safe, keep me safe. [snip] If I have anymore mainstream media and government safety shoved up my [butt], I’ll be walking like a pogo stick.
I don’t want to be kept safer by my government. I don’t like the brand of safety my government is dishing out to me. I am safe enough for my liking. My odds of being killed on the highway by someone text messaging is much greater than being killed by a foreign terrorist. I have a better chance of hitting the lottery than being killed by a terrorist.
The few people and their friends that have been directly touched by terrorist activity have no right to go control freak on me and dictate more inconvenience and cost to me. I’ll take my chances with what little so called terrorism there is in my country and abroad. I like my odds.
I’m kept plenty safe in my country by my nuclear powered submarine fleet with Poseidon missiles. I’m kept plenty safe with my nuclear powered aircraft carrier fleets. I’m kept plenty safe with my air force fleets and their tomahawk and cruise missiles. I’m kept plenty safe with my intercontinental ballistic missile systems. I’m kept plenty safe with my patriot missile systems. I’m kept plenty safe with my spy satellite systems. I’m kept plenty safe with my 700 military bases in 130 countries. I’m kept plenty safe with all the police forces in my country.
If I let them try to make me any safer, they may as well put a strait jacket on me. [snip] the MSM and the control freaks brand of safety. [snip] the TSA and homeland security’s brand of safety. They can shove their brand of excessive safety up their own [butts].
Time to Pop the Safety Bubble.
Safety dance
Submitted by meekandmild on Tue, 01/12/2010 – 21:16.
This video is metaphorical. We all keep pursuing safety while metaphorically speaking, keep dancing together, but we can never reach the goal of total safety, and we keep dancing for it. The question is Why? Why bother? The best we can do is follow the blueprint. Just follow the Constitution and accept it. The results aren’t so bad.
Here’s a screen shot I took of the last seconds of the video. It shows a fighter bomber in one frame.
http://www.imagecross.com/11/image-hosting-view-25.php?id=807Safety-Dance-Story.JPG
Regards timelines of leaked emails. For those new to this site, you may have missed Jo Nova’s piece “Announcing The Timeline, “ClimateGate: 30 years in the making.” link below.
http://joannenova.com.au/2009/12/climategate-30-years-in-the-making/#more-5586
Completely OT, sorry!
But this looks as if it will be fun!
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/world-mainmenu-26/south-america-mainmenu-37/2724-bolivia-to-host-alternative-climate-conference
That will be even more air miles for all the greenie useful idiots! I’m sure the BBC will be making their block booking right now.
Do you think that in the future people will ask ‘Where were you when Climategate broke ?’
For my part, I was trying to edit a video for a steel company with my iPhone in one hand and my mind definitely not on the job !
I had a strange feeling of expectation and excitement, a bit like I felt as a kid on Christmas Day.
Blogs like WUWT, CA, tAV and the Blackboard are the news media now.
This would make for a very interesting movie one day.
TBR.cc: NZ scientist at centre of Pachauri allegations refuses to talk
http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_briefing_room/2010/01/nz-scientist-at-centre-of-pachauri-allegations-refuses-to-talk.html
NZ scientist at centre of Pachauri allegations refuses to talk.
The New Zealand climate scientist named in a British news article headlined “Pachauri: Money Laundering?”, is today refusing to talk to the news media about the allegations. Investigator Richard North writes at Eureferendum:
‘A British government department, DEFRA, has paid taxpayers’ money to a British University which in turn paid it to the British subsidiary of an Indian research organisation, which in turn seems to have paid it to a New Zealand university scientist so that he could work for an international organisation based in Geneva – the IPCC.’
Welcome to the bizarre world of climate change politics, where nothing is what it seems and governments indulge in behaviour which, in other circumstances, would look very much like money laundering. But, bizarre though it might appear, this is only half the story. The reality is even more convoluted – the word “bizarre” doesn’t even begin to describe it.
The tale emerges from our trail of the millions salted away by climate change “hero” Rajendra Pachauri, and the role of TERI Europe, his outpost of Empire in London. When we were first alerted to this payment from DEFRA of £30,417 by one of our forum members at the beginning of the month, we found it had been paid to Cambridge University, “to provide funding to TERI Europe to cover salary and travel cost of the head of unit responsible to produce a Synthesis Report of the IPCC AR4.” Given that the only link (we thought) between TERI and the IPCC was Dr R K Pachauri, we naturally assumed that the money was intended for the good doctor. We were wrong. That he was paid this money is denied by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) – which has taken over some duties from DEFRA. The press office at DECC, however, has been unable (so far) to tell us to whom the money was paid. That information came from none other than Mrs Robins, aka Ritu Kumar, director and company secretary of TERI Europe. In response to our questions, she informs us that the money went to Dr Andrew Reisinger (pictured), whom she tells us, is currently a senior fellow at the New Zealand Climate Change Research Institute. Andy, as he likes to be known, is a figure of some importance in the “climate community”. As head of the Technical Support Unit for the synthesis report group of the IPCC, he was responsible to his “core group” co-author Rajendra Pachauri for co-ordinating the drafting of the “synthesis report” to the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). The importance of this synthesis report cannot be overstated…(read more here) Investigate magazine contacted Andy Reisinger on his mobile phone this afternoon, NZ time. He had not heard of the scandal breaking over payments made to him: “I haven’t heard anything, but actually I’m on parental leave until February 8 –”
It’s looking at TERI which you have some links to
“Well, I mean, that goes back to when I was working for the IPCC, and as I say I’m currently on parental leave and I’m actually not terribly interested in the story”
But they’re accusing the set up of being basically a money-laundering route to effectively pay you under the table, what’s your response to that?
“I don’t have a response to it because I’m currently on parental leave.”
It doesn’t bug you, doesn’t concern you?
“No, it only bugs me that you called me while I was on parental leave”.
Reisinger hung up on Investigate.
Guess it’ll be another chapter in the upcoming new edition of Air Con
In my view, the most contentious part of the timeline has always been the very first event related to the zip file being uploaded to Real Climate. I admit I don’t post very often to RC, but I don’t recall there being a file upload option. Assuming there is not such an option, this implies that our whistle blower must have had login credentials to the RC server (via FTP, SSH, etc). Has this point ever been clarified to anyone’s satisfaction?
Even assuming that a public upload option exists, it seems very odd to me that someone would upload such a large file over a public interface on RC’s web site. Furthermore, the person uploading the file must have anticipated that the file would be uploaded successfully and that it would be made publicly downloadable. This seems highly implausible as it would imply that that the person was woefully ignorant of the well known RC policy of tightly controlling and censoring all user commentary and input (which would defeat the purpose of uploading a rather large and unwieldy file of highly sensitive data).
Then there was this curious statement from an official CRU press release on December 3rd: “On Tuesday November 17, a substantial file including over 1000 emails either sent from or sent to members of the Climatic Research Unit (‘CRU’) at the University of East Anglia, was downloaded on the RealClimate website, together with meteorological station data used for research by CRU into the rate of the Earth’s warming, particularly over the past 150 years, and other material.” This statement makes it clear that the file existed on the RC server, that it was publicly downloadable, and that someone had downloaded it. This implies that the security breach originated on Real Climate’s site.
How could any person have placed such a large file on the RC servers without having the proper credentials? If he had an account then would he not be easily traceable?
Link to UEA press release mentioned: http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/dec/CRUreview
Steve is an aerospace engineer.
======
I may have been one of the first people to contact the US Senate on the Climate Gate Issue:
http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2009/11/some-verification-of-hadley-cru-files.html
and
http://rankexploits.com/musings/2009/real-files-or-fake/
M. Simon (Comment#23855) November 20th, 2009 at 1:16 am
I have already done a couple of posts on this and sent some of the details to my Senate Contact.
True or false (I’m inclined to true) this is going to put a lot of ink in the water and destroy a forest or two.
Also I link back to here.
That would have been on the night of the 19th as I keep GMT.
The exact time I contacted the Senate (Republican contact):
Thursday, November 19, 2009 11:41 PM Central Time
I got a response from my Senate contact at:
Friday, November 20, 2009 8:17 PM
I was glued to WUWT, as usual, and managed to post the first comment. I said that the cat was out of the bag and into the box. I wish I’d thought of something wittier, like “The Uncovery of Global Warming” (a dig at the book, The Discovery of Global Warming).
I get the feeling that more people than just Mosher know who the discloser of the files is (are). The readers here are only left to speculate. That’s a little irritating. I hope to find out someday soon.
Off topic. Interesting photos from around the world of the cold
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34689202/ns/weather-picture_stories/displaymode/1247/?beginSlide=1
” I note that Anthony Watts claimed to know the identity of the mole. Are the leaks back in July related to the Climategate leak in anyway? ”
No as Anthony explains in his reply Steve McIntyre, Anthony and I were having fun with CRU. They had left a version of the data Mcintyre had requested in full view on an FTP site. All the while they are arguing that if this data was released to McIntyre that “international relations would be harmed” DANG, thats some pretty secret data there. temperature data that will harm international relations if its given to a researcher. What did jones do with this national security temperature data. he had it on his own personal webpage. DOH! So Mc got a copy. Others of us got copies just in case.. and then a “mole hunt” insued. In the End Dr. Jones was caught.
P gosslin. SteveMc and charles and I have disclosed all we know. we have to live in uncertainty. I’d put the SD very tight around norwich.
REPLY: That’s true, and I don’t know the identity either. All we know about the comment left at WUWT is that it came from an anonymous proxy server in Riyadh Saudi Arabia with a link to an FTP server in Russia. The trail stops there. – Anthony
tokyoboy (23:10:10) :
Heavily OT, but I need a help from an English native. I am now proofreading my article on the Climategate, to be published in mid-February, in Japanese language, where the proper names should be written, in letters quite strange to you folks, in accordance to their pronunciation. One name I’m not certain about is “Saiers”. Is its pronunciation close to that of “say” + “-ers”, or ?
Thanks.
For one thing, we would not say “the Climategate” but simply “Climategate” as it is a name, as we would say “David” or “Anna” instead of “the David” or “the Anna.” That would be different if the word was used to denote a specific object or thing, as in “the Climategate scandal” or “the Bush Doctrine” or “the Lewinsky affair .”
Please note that on some things there may be a difference between American English speakers and British English speakers. Americans will say someone has “gone to the hospital” while Brits will say “gone to hospital,” for example.
“Saiers” looks like it should be pronounced “say-ers,” as you said. But if it originally came from a non-English speaking country, perhaps France, it might be pronounced “saurs,” like in “dinosaurs.” However I, an American English speaker, would assume “say-ers” unless informed otherwise. When using a “Y” as a vowel, the switching of a “y” with an “i” for the same pronunciation can be done, as with “Yay” and “Yai.” “Sayers” is likely an alternate spelling of the original family name.
Good luck on the article!