CEI’s Chris Horner asks WUWT readers for some help in locating “Phil Jones’s Aspirations”
So, I’m leafing through another 1,500 pages of emails dumped on me by NASA in an apparent attempt to forestall litigation we informed them was coming this week after the clock tolls on their requirement to comply with requests under the Freedom of Information Act (it’s complicated, so here’s the gist of what two of the requests were about; the third one is about NASA using taxpayer resources to produce content for and manage the third-party “global warming” activist operation RealClimate, which you will read about soon).
Near the end of the first of three large folders of documents I see a particular email thread between James Hansen and Phil Jones.
In Jones’ final reply at the top of the thread, there is some mildly interesting discussion of e.g., China temperatures, and then, after a little nattering about how those ocean temperature observations seem too cool for their tastes and so clearly the observations are wrong, Jones writes to Hansen, “As I think you might has said earlier, we aren’t doing a great job in measuring surface T[emperatures] in a consistent manner”.
But, before this and in the same email, Jones admits to Hansen, “I hope the Met Office prediction for 2015 in last week’s Science are correct!” [hyperlink to Met Office press release added]
He is referring to the prediction by the Met Office, in Science magazine’s August 10, 2007 issue, of accelerating “global warming” leading to record temperatures, beginning 2009 or so. The article (by Doug Smith et al.) is behind a paywall, but it declared an understanding, courtesy of a new modeling technique, that we will see at least five years claiming “warmest ever” by the year 2015.
It is possible that someone in Jones’ position hopes for record temperatures simply because their enterprise thrives on the global warming panic. But I was reminded of an earlier email of Jones’s, which I thought had made the rounds pre-CRUGate, asserting in response to a challenge that, yes, he does wish/want/need disruptive anthropogenic climate change to be true/real (the precise word choice eludes me), because it will cause society to straighten up and fly right in terms of its policies and lifestyles.
I cannot locate this email, either by web-searching or on the various East Anglia email sites. So, I appeal to readers: who can recall and produce a copy of that earlier Jones email?
I ask because together they do rather support the argument that the global warming alarmists, even if donning the vestments of “science”, remain ideological advocates. They want their Man-as-agent-of-doom theory to be true, they need it to be true. Such evidence would certainly color their claims, and the exposed fudging, lying, withholding and the rest of the nasty little bag of tricks that collectively amount to pushing an agenda. With a line of reasoning that goes do what I want or people die! In the name of “science”.
The irony here is that the same issue of Science published a letter [subscription required] by Robert Gitzen of the University of Missouri, titled “The Dangers of Advocacy in Science”.
Regardless, any help in tracking down this earlier Phil Jones email is appreciated.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Boris (17:40:41) :
Yep, conspiracy theories abound, yours is one.
DavE
“Its part of the attack of the corporate-funded attack machine, i.e. its a direct and highly intended outcome of a highly orchestrated, heavily-funded corporate attack campaign.”
WOW. Was going to provide some clever analysis. Decided to go with… WOW.
“If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen,
so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences”
I read that about 12 times and I still have the same gut response. This sounds to me like a guy who got commited to his position way too early, has a nagging suspicion that he’s probably wrong but can’t quite admit it to himself, and is desperate that a miracle will happen and he will be saved… even if millions (billions?) of lives are in peril to do it. Selfish indeed.
Is it possible that some of the folks at the center of the controversies might benefit from the catharsis of an apology or two?
“If anything, I would like to see the [anthropomorphic global warming] climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isn’t being political, it is being selfish.”
Phil Jones is stating that he wants HIS alleged science to be proved right, he doesn’t seem to care about what is really going on in the Objective Reality of Nature. Is there a bucket I can puke into?
Not only is it selfish it’s a confession that he is a bad scientist with a serious bias. Combine it with his other statements about choosing him and his group being the ones to pick which scientific papers are the important ones and their shenanigans in controlling what scientific papers gets published and you’ll see his bias in action. It’s evidently a highly motivated bias that reveals his criminal intents.
Toss Phil Jones in jail.
“A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth.” – Albert Einstein
john m –
why would the east anglia version be truncated like that? any ideas?
Hi,
this has nothing to do with the subject discussed here, but why does nobody comment te fact that the emissions scenarios (SRES) are based on totally unrealistic fossil fuel reserves ?
This fact is confirmed by the following e-mail
http://eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=112&filename=926947295.txt
“I want to make one thing really clear. We ARE NOT supposed to be working
with the assumption that these scenarios are realistic. ”
etc etc…
For example the SRES scenarios are based on oil consumption between 11ZJ and 50ZJ (with median scenarios between 17ZJ and 30ZJ, source : SRES hydrocarbon use), when the utlimate ressources of oil are estimated to be 11ZJ (source : eia, aie, bp, …) ?
Cheers
Boris,
Keep pretending that skeptics are all conspiracy wackos. It has really helped you so far, no?
I mean, do anything it takes to avoid actually engaging on the topic. Denial is all that is left to the AGW hardcore, now.
Isn’t this going to call for wooden stakes and like, um, silver ammunition?
.
.
Boris, there would not be a conspiracy if Phil Jones, Michael Mann, Keith Briffa, Hansen, et. al. where actually honest scientists seeking the facts of the Objective Reality of Nature rather than following their “selfish” driven political agendas. Instead the evidence shows that they are merely alleged scientists who’ll push any rubbish as if it’s true. Rather than seeing that the evidence in the Natural world is falsifying their alleged AGW hypothesis they “hide the decline” and privately admit it’s failed while publicly putting on a false face.
The only reason it’s a conspiracy Boris is that THEY evidently conspired.
Phil Jones wants the world to end.
And he wants to [snip] us all before it happens.
This isn’t the quote you are looking for but there are many, many just like it long before Phil Jones was a blip on the world stage.
>>”No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits…. climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.” [Calgary Herald, December 14, 1998].
>>Canadian Environmental Minister
I know this is a science site and not a political one and with all due respect to Boris, this has always been a political fight and not a scientific one. Debunking the science is interesting and frankly relatively easy compared to the political side of the equation but this will never end until people realize this has never been about science. It’s about money and power.
Boris, someone once said that science was like a sharp tool that scientists play with and like children they sometimes cut themselves. That is just what the the team did while playing around. We now now this. You do too-you just can’t stand the knowledge of that.
Re, Boris (17:40:41),
Hey Boris, be specific… Conspiracies of what?
Know—-please correct
Boris, if you’re looking for conspirators, ask Wigley – it was he who on 25 June 05 used the term “co-conspirators” to describe the Hockey Team.
Jack has it right about Jones wanting the worl to end. I only hope that we can [snip] him before he [snips] us.
hunter (18:52:00) :
Denial is all that is left to the AGW hardcore, now>>
Not so. They’ve got spelling. I was going through a thread on Tamino’s site and there was a whole section calling down WUWT for being full of bad spellers. I mean like tiresome and repetitive and like it somehow proved something. I’m feeling real bad about this because me and spelling don’t get along so good, I had no idea that this was proof of flawed science. I’m really did believe that accurate data, documented procedures, clearly described theory, accurate measurements from relevant experiments and comparison of reults in order to draw realistic conclusions was more important than knowing how to spell anomaly. anomally. anomallie. Rats, whole comment is trash now. You would think after reading 12 comments or so making fun of it I would have remembered the correct spelling.
Repy: Funy ~ ctn
What respect is actually due Boris?
Mark
Sun gazing = watching grass grow. ‘Cept I like watching grass grow. Better than cutting it.
ClimateGate … the gift that keeps on giving.
johnnythelowery (18:11:23) :
SUN GOES ON SPRING BREAK
This from Layman’s SunSpot site […]
This is complete nonsense. The sun is ramping up towards [probably a weak] maximum, but up nevertheless.
Here are TSI, F10.7, and sunspot number
http://www.leif.org/research/TSI-SORCE-2008-now.png
and here is the solar wind magnetic field [blue] and speed [pink]:
http://www.leif.org/research/Solar-Wind-Now.png
On the way up there are variations mostly brought about by solar rotation as the peaks and valleys are about 27 days apart.
Anthony, this isn’t the email you were looking for, but by my reading is quite incriminating of Phil Jones:
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/03/another-awful-email-from-phil-jones.html
In point #4 Phil Jones says his “biggest worry is China. CMA [The Chinese Meteorological Agency] don’t (sic) measure at airports, and they keep moving suburban locations a few more miles out as the cities expand…hope they will…send me their adjusted data (for site moves, but not urban influences). They are doing some reasonable work, but not seeing the big picture…”
As I understand this email, Phil Joneses biggest worry is that China doesn’t have upwardly biased temperature records like many other parts of the world because they don’t measure at airports and keep moving thermometers further out as the cities expand. What a terrible practice that is! And why isn’t Phil interested in the urban influences data? It must be that the Chinese are not seeing the big picture… And what big picture would that be that Phil didn’t want to put in writing in this email?
Someone please tell me I misunderstood and why. And please also explain #1 listed under “other issues” on why NCDC will be increasing global temps from about 2000 onwards. Hansen likes this and says in his reply at top that the NOAA SSTs [sea surface temperatures] seemed just a hair cool to him as well.
If you have Leif’s Sun graphs as a favorite under Bookmarks on your toolbar, it shows up with a smiley face icon. I like the blank Sun in-between lazy sunspot groups. It gives me a chance to soak in and understand what I am seeing. Like watching your lawn wake up from winter sleep. It appears we won’t be “waking up a sleeping giant” (WWII paraphrase from the Pacific Fleet Japanese Admiral), we will just be waking up a slumbering lawn.
Also discovered some interesting things about realclimate.org’s Gavin Schmidt in these emails:
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/03/good-science-gets-its-revenge.html
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/03/gavin-schmidts-good-science-part-2.html
Hay! I rezent that remark! My spelling is ackurut to within pluss or minus .5330205e4odne3o4t5u digreze. Addmitudly, it gits better win I drink milk insted ov zinfindell.