McIntyre: From Climategate To Guardiangate

Picture of David Leigh

David Leigh - Source: The Guardian

The Guardian Is “Bemused”

by Steve McIntyre, Climate Audit, 6 August 2011

David Leigh of the Guardian has been added to the list of UK journalists who’ve engaged in phone hacking and other illegal/unethical conduct. Some of the more questionable conduct by UK journalists has involved their acquisition of information from police that police were not legally entitled to disclose either for payment or as a favour. David Leigh also had a role in the Empire Strikes Back phase of Climategate early last year and, in today’s post, I’ll discuss the connection.

Leigh’s admission of phone hacking is discussed at Bishop Hill here; Guido Fawkes here. Leigh himself admitted here.

There is certainly a voyeuristic thrill in hearing another person’s private messages…

Leigh differentiated his illegal phone hacking from that practised by News of the World because his cause was noble:

unlike Goodman, I was not interested in witless tittle-tattle about the royal family. I was looking for evidence of bribery and corruption.

Now the Climategate connection.

In February 2010, a couple of months after Neil Wallis of Outside Organisation had been retained by the University of East Anglia to help them strike back against critics, Leigh authored a smear against Paul Dennis of the University of East Anglia, entitled:

Detectives question climate change scientist over email leaks: University of East Anglia scientist Paul Dennis denies leaking material, but links to climate change sceptics in US drew him to attention of the investigators

Leigh’s smear began by reporting that Norfolk police had interviewed Paul Dennis (as, presumably, other faculty of the University of East Anglia.) However, Dennis had “refused to sign a petition in support of Jones when the scandal broke”. Furthermore, according to Leigh’s apparently disapproving “university sources”, Dennis was reported to have sent a letter to UEA head of department Jacquie Burgess “calling for more open release of data” – suspicious activity indeed. Dennis had also refused to observe the fatwa against communication with climate blogs that were critical of CRU and the Team and had even sent an article on isotopes to Jeff Id.

Leigh’s article disclosed two pieces of information that were not in the public domain.

First, Leigh “outed” Jeff Id by name, occupation and hometown. To that point, “Jeff Id” had been anonymous. His registration at WordPress was anonymous and his gmail account was anonymous. To Jeff’s knowledge, there was no public information that would enable Leigh to identify him.

Complete writeup here at Climate Audit

=======================================================

Bishop Hill writes here:

Leigh’s name has come to prominence in recent days, with the UK’s premier political blogger, Guido Fawkes, accusing the Guardian man of being involved in phone hacking. The evidence seems pretty incontrovertible, and Leigh appears to be highly unamused to have it broadcast to all and sundry. All good clean family fun.

h/t to Benny Peiser at The GWPF.

Advertisements

100 thoughts on “McIntyre: From Climategate To Guardiangate

  1. For the non-UK readers, the Guardian has been stoking the News International hacking story for some time, bring it back from the dead at least twice and has been taking a holier than thou stance to boot. The Chickens are coming home to roost.

  2. Poor Jeff. I’m appalled.
    Gaining access to someone’s private correspondence and reproducing it in the public domain without their permission.
    Got any more Climategate files to share with us Anthony? Oh, wait.

    REPLY:
    Got any more smart-assed quips that don’t speak to the issue of law and journalistic integrity? Oh, wait – Anthony

  3. I’m still betting that the whole reason the Outside Organization folks were hired was to do some of that “unofficial information gathering” on their opponents and CRU’s own employees, and phone hacking was probably part of it.
    Think about it: when the investigation of Climategate kicked off, they could have hired a LOT of different public relations firms – what are the odds they’d randomly hire the one that was already involved in the phone hacking scandal?

  4. To Shaun Dunne:
    Indeed, the release of private correspondence without the permission of the author is something that all sides are quick to condemn . . . when it happens to them. Are you equally sanctimonious regarding the pentagon files and wikileaks? That being said, Anthony did not release the CRU e-mails. He repeated them. There is a pretty substantial difference there. What is more important, the CRU e-mails and all of their content were subject to FOI legislation. As such, they were always public domain. Jeff Id’s identity was not.
    Ok, enough feeding of the trolls for today.
    JE

  5. The attitude of leftist media towards illegaly obtained materials demonstrates the power of doublethink; compare “Wikileaks” media treatment to “Climategate”.
    Shaun Dunne demonstrates it perfectly.

  6. So, according to this Guardian hack, his breaking the law is okay because he’s a lefty lickspittle nobly sticking it to people he fails to agree with?
    I hope they throw the book at the hypocritical creep.

  7. Shaun D. confirms the impression one gets that only Warmists and liberals are above the law. Climategate was an obvious attempt to expose a hoax. Mr. Leigh was involved in covering up the hoax.
    “We know that the University of East Anglia retained a former News of the World operative with close connections to the police as an agent to strike back against their critics.”
    As well as complicit left-wing journalists that put cause above ethics.

  8. The real problem is one that the government of the UK should be concerned about: How did information from a police investigation get into the hands of a Guardian reporter? How did The Guardian get access to confidential “police files” and publish that information without any consequence at the time?
    The other question is exactly why would The Guardian publish Jeff’s personal details in the first place? How did that further the story? My own speculation is that the purpose of revealing that information was to send a message to anyone else who may wish to cooperate with authorities in the investigation. The notion being that the AGW “industry” has “friends in high places” and if you cross them, you might pay a price for that. Basically, I see it as intimidating others by making an example out of Jeff.
    I would want the police unit involved to explain in fine detail to the citizens of the UK exactly how the information contained in those “police files” come in to the possession of The Guardian.

  9. The Guardian faces both ways
    Hacking and theft of email and other data is ok by the Guardian if it’s called Wikileaks

  10. I agree that the Police corruption element is the most worrying because it’s the most common. As for Leigh; dodgy Barnet, dodgy geezer.

  11. One possible link between the retention of Neil Wallis of Outside Organisation by the University of East Anglia could be Norfolk’s former Chief Constable (also former Assistant Commissioner, Metropolitan Police) Andy Hayman the tyro jouranlist now writing regularly for the Times.

  12. Anthony, this is indeed an intriguing direction in the Climategate affair. The implications here are staggering – in fact far beyond mere hacking but that of the personal privacy of ever citizen on the planet is called into question. That those in the so called “respectable” press who “we” trust as the guardians of our freedoms in western society have been the very culprits hacking private citizens and buying information on private citizen from police (who themselves are supposed to be the direct guardians of western freedoms) are horrifying.
    Moreover, technology companies who supply private communication devices used by citizens must also be called to the carpet to answer to the ease of the hacking now revealed in the UK using their very own products. No one here in North America should sleep well knowing the vulnerabilities of such poor devices making everyone at risk. No doubt this is only the tip of the iceberg – but in this particular case the damage to Paul Dennis is done.
    As per the refusal to answer Steve’s direct questions – someone will soon be suing both The Guardian, David Leigh, and the police for millions. I hope they break those criminals. The message needs to be harsh and brutal otherwise a slap on the wrist will merely open the floodgates to hacking worldwide.

  13. Well Well Well!
    Last year in June I attended a public event on “Privacy and Public Policy”
    http://www.idea.leeds.ac.uk/2010/01/public-event-on-privacy-and-public-policy-18th-june-2010/
    Looky who was on the speakers list.
    After listening to this hypocritical toerag waffle on about ‘legitimate use of sources’ for 20 minutes I was pretty annoyed by his obviously partisan slant.
    After the event I fronted Leigh up and told him about my little adventure with the Norfolk plod interviewing me as a possible suspect in the climategate ‘hacking’ and asked him eye to eye what he thought of the UEA passing my details given on my FOIA request to Plod and the contrast with the lack of information UEA was prepared to give to me. Then I asked him if he thought public policy on climate justified that.. He instantly broke eye contact, waffled more platitudes about legitimate investigation and legitimate (a favourite word of his) refusal of FOIA requests, shuffled his feet and couldn’t wait to get away.
    What a lying unethical slimeball this man is.

  14. Shaun Dunne: There is generally no expectation of privacy when using or communicating with tax payer funded communications equipment. Or, for that matter, corporate equipment. The communications are the property of the owner of the equipment, be it public or private.
    On the other hand, there is an expectation of privacy in most communications with police, and if its explicitly asked for with a reporter (unless of course its newsworthy).
    See the difference? Oh, wait. That requires clarity and objectivity. Never mind.

  15. It’s truly amazing how lefty trolls descend to crude invective.
    Is that a characteristic of ‘believers’ (‘warmist/alarmists’ – your choice)?

  16. Civil suit, I think. Plus prosecution under a whole range of legislation. Computer Misuse Act 1990 (UK) to name but one. I look forward to Leigh and all of those involved losing both liberty and livelihood.
    Also, if Leigh has also been complicit in compromising data security of US citizens, might he not be a candidate for extradition? The US penalties are far more draconian, and range from one to twenty years (Plus fine). Ouch.

  17. To commenters with journalism degrees.
    If there is any school of journalism graduates commenting, I have a question for you.
    In any school of journalism, is there any explicit teaching about higher goals to be pursued journalistically for the benefit of saving to earth (ideological environmentalism). Where doing journalist work on it has a special set of journalistic priorities and special situation integrity? Are strategies of covering ideological environmentalism specifically taught? Etc, etc . . . .
    With the swirl of the recent phone hacking incidents and the longstanding MSM silence on climate science integrity, I can only think there must be.
    I sincerely am asking
    John

  18. “Climategate has basically been debunked”
    “Climategate” is quite simply a name given to a package of data that was made public in Nov 2009.
    All the data in the package has been certified genuine by the authors of the originals. Therefor it is not possible for “Climategate has basically been debunked” to be a statement that can carry any credibilty.

  19. flamenco says:
    August 6, 2011 at 1:58 pm

    Thanks for the link to that detailed analysis. It is really something. I loved this quotation, straight from Michael Mann, no less “…reasonably consensus viewpoint…”

  20. Shaun doesn’t get it! If you work in a public institution – or using public funds, your work is just that: *public*. If you want to have privacy, you face the immediate problems of perceived conflicts of interest and need to start being very transparent about how you manage the public and private split. There is now so much money at stake in the Climate arena, that I don’t think Climate Researchers necessarily understand this either.
    The hacking aspect is much more worrying. Who watches the watchers? Surveillance in any form must be subject to very carefully thought out checks and balances because of the power it’s use bestows. I’m not entirely sure those checks and balances work well in ‘western’ democracies. I’m certain they aren’t present in ‘western’ media organizations!
    / sarc
    Perhaps they think it’s just ‘peer-review’ if you know what private conversations are going on?
    /sarc off

  21. cirby August 6, 2011 at 11:41 am
    And for others not familiar with British society: Recall the famous “nudge-nudge, wink-wink” Monty Python sketch.
    A lot can be arranged in British society without actually directly stating the agreements .. it’s all done with a nudge-nudge, wink-wink. It allows plausible deniability. “Honest, your honour, I had no idea he would do such a stupid thing. I was just larfing around. I woz being hypothetical”

  22. Brian says:
    August 6, 2011 at 3:59 pm
    It seems Climategate has basically been debunked:
    ================================================
    Brian, if you read any of the emails or any of the Henry files….
    …you would know that what you just said is impossible
    If you did read any of them…..then you just want to believe

  23. All this leaves me to believe the CRU know who did the leak.
    Perhapse an FOI request ….:-)

  24. Brian is basically being debunked.
    Every time he posts!
    I think that’s the consensus…hang on let me ask my best friends and several of my employees….
    Yes we all agree. It’s settled..

  25. High integrity people indeed… and in the end those exposed in Climategate have only their writing to blame.

  26. “Latitude says:
    August 6, 2011 at 5:37 pm
    Brian, if you read any of the emails or any of the Henry files….
    …you would know that what you just said is impossible
    If you did read any of them…..then you just want to believe”
    They’ve been cleared.

  27. Nigel S says:
    August 6, 2011 at 12:35 pm ,,, dodgy Barnet, dodgy geezer
    For those who don’t understand … a “Barnet” refers in Cockney rhyming slang to Barnet Fair AKA hair. Oh, and a “geezer” is a bloke, or guy, man etc. Not sure where that came from. As a kid, my friends and I would say, after we had done something we thought naughty, “Let’s Scapa (pronouced scarper)”. Only late did I realise this refered to Scapa Flow (Let’s Go) the UK’s major naval refuge.

  28. Brian says:
    August 6, 2011 at 3:59 pm

    It seems Climategate has basically been debunked:
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/Climategate-CRU-emails-hacked.htm

    The Climategate data is accurate. I think what you meant to say is “UEA has been absolved or wrongdoing.” That is quite debatable and has been debated here. Do not look to skepticalscience.com for all sides of a story.
    Actually, “The investigations into UEA were a whitewash” would be a lot closer to the truth.

  29. Kudos to Steve and Anthony; I always thought that this involved more then just the News of the World. With the prejudice exhibited by the MSM, I’m not surprised this amoral man was caught in the quagmire.
    I definitely think there will be more reveals to come.
    On a side note, the Guardian has been slamming the right-wing Murdoch and his empire since the scandal broke. Wonder if they’ll trash themselves now?

  30. Brian,
    No one, including the Climategate principals such as Jones, Santer, Mann, Schmidt, Wigley, etc., have ever denied that the leaked emails and the Harry_read_me file were genuine and verbatim. As usual, it is Skeptical Pseudo-science that is debunked. But what do you expect from a propaganda blog run by a cartoonist?
    For a link to the emails, see here. There is also the “Climategate” tab in the menu at the top of the WUWT home page.
    For the Harry_read_me file, see here.
    The emails and file show beyond any doubt that at least thirteen years of temperature data was completely fabricated. And it’s interesting that every revision of past data by CRU is adjusted upward. What are the odds, eh?
    If you wouldn’t call that fraud, what would you call it? Complete incompetence by a clique of highly paid PhD’s? No; with so much money at stake, those self-serving climate charlatans deviously gamed the system at the expense of the taxpaying public. IMHO, only a fool would believe otherwise.

  31. For Robert of Ottawa (August 6, 2011 at 5:55 pm)
    Re: the origin of Geezer, most likely it derives from the now obsolete term guiser, meaning someone who walks around in disguise. Used thus in contemporary slang to mean someone with something to hide it has recently evolved into the generic and has now, as you say, simply come to mean bloke or dude.
    Some say however (though I make no claims as to its voracity) that the following text was found in a scroll in the stores of the British Museum that originally came from the Buddhist cave shrines of Dunhuang:
    In the Worlds before Geezers,
    Primal chaos reigned, Heaven sought order.
    But the Phoenix can fly only when its feathers are grown.
    The four worlds formed again and yet again,
    As endless eons wheeled and passed.
    Time and the pure essences of Heaven,
    The moistures of the Earth,
    And the powers of the Sun and the Moon
    All worked upon a certain rock – old as Creation,
    And it magically became fertile.
    That first egg was named Thought,
    Tathagata Buddha, the Father Buddha,
    Said, ‘With our thoughts we make the world.’
    Elemental forces caused the egg to hatch,
    from it then came a diamond Geezer.
    The nature of the Diamond Geezer was irrepressible!

    (h/t to ‘Quins fans everywhere)

  32. Brian says on August 6, 2011 at 3:59 pm
    It seems Climategate has basically been debunked …

    They’ve been cleared. …

    Cover blown; trollish distractions no longer scoring ‘goals’ for Hockey Team … time for a ‘make-over’ Bri …
    .

  33. John Whitman says:
    In any school of journalism, is there any explicit teaching about higher goals to be pursued journalistically for the benefit of saving to earth (ideological environmentalism).
    ++++++++
    In Hollywood it is the norm for the hero/heroine to resign, hand in their badge and hunt the perp on their own. America loves heroes and expects progress to come from them. Thus there is a strong preference to bend the rules when the outcome is a foregone conclusion in favour of their prejudices.
    The problems come when that conclusion turns out not to be so sure, or the hero has holes in their moral socks. Philosophically it is a version of ‘history is written by the winner’.
    With climate science the thumbs are pressing so hard on the scales to maintain gravitas that it is now a foregone conclusion there are going to be some very hard falls and red faces.
    Yawn…

  34. crosspatch says:
    August 6, 2011 at 12:11 pm
    “…I would want the police unit involved to explain in fine detail to the citizens of the UK exactly how the information contained in those “police files” come in to the possession of The Guardian.”
    #%#& that. Prosecute them. Too many times have “law enforcement” been placed on a pedestal with more rights and importance than the citizenry they are supposed to be working for. Time and time again you see cases where the penalties issued against criminals are MORE severe simply because the victim happened to have been a police officer.
    If they are that important, then the penalty for THEM being the criminal should be logarithmically MORE severe.

  35. “David Leigh of the Guardian has been added to the list of UK journalists who’ve engaged in phone hacking and other illegal/unethical conduct. Some of the more questionable conduct by UK journalists has involved their acquisition of information from police that police were not legally entitled to disclose either for payment or as a favour. David Leigh also had a role in the Empire Strikes Back phase of Climategate early last year and, in today’s post, I’ll discuss the connection.” … Steve McIntyre

    Andrew30 [August 6, 2011 at 11:25 am] says:
    Kettle, Pot
    Goose, Gander
    Glass Houses, Rocks
    First Stone
    Last Laugh

    Fate it seems, is not without a sense of irony.Morpheus

  36. (Sorry this is OT tips and notes isn’t working and I think this is important)
    An independent environment agency could be set up in Northern Ireland
    What’s next for Northern Ireland? a full-blown carbon tax and the setup of a price on carbon??
    will there really be unelected people taking decisions on behalf of the people there influenced by Friends of the Earth and their Man Made Climate Change fraud to be enforced and regulated by environmental soviet style green police?
    I think it will be a disaster for the Northern Ireland population of an estimated 1.8 million people.
    Background
    [In 2008 then Environment Minister Arlene Foster said there would be no independent Environment Protection Agency (EPA). The main demand for one came from various environmental non-governmental organizations. At the time Ms Foster said: “I’m opposed to the setting-up of yet more quangos where unelected people take decisions on behalf of the people.”]
    Source: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/environment/back-on-table-environmental-watchdog-plan-16033182.html
    It seems that a Climate Change Levy is slowly being introduced undemocratically to Northern Ireland.
    “From 1 April 2011, the exemption for supplies of natural gas in Northern Ireland has been removed and replaced with a lower rate of CCL. A lower rate will apply until 31 October 2013. From 1 November 2013, supplies of gas will be subject to the main rate of CCL. From 1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012, this lower rate of levy is set at 0.059 pence per kilowatt hour.”
    And after 31 October 2013 Northern Ireland will enjoy a full blown Carbon Tax!
    http://www.nibusinessinfo.co.uk/bdotg/action/detail?itemId=1074404189&r.l1=1079068363&r.l2=1086021901&r.l3=1074403838&r.s=sc&site=191&type=RESOURCES

  37. Wil says:
    August 6, 2011 at 12:57 pm
    As per the refusal to answer Steve’s direct questions – someone will soon be suing both The Guardian, David Leigh, and the police for millions.

    In the UK? Are you serious? Never happen.

  38. High five to Guido Fawkes for breaking the story. By the way, Leigh also used Guido’s real name in a Tweet
    David Leigh@davidleigh3
    David Leigh
    “Some clown called Harry Cole aka Guido Fawkes says I’m having a go at him because he has an embarassing tale abt me. Dream on, son”
    July 11, 2011 4:36 pm
    It appears Leigh likes to out peoples real names as a threat just the same is he did with Jeff Id!
    http://order-order.com/2011/08/05/david-leigh-the-guardians-hacker-in-chief-lied-to-guido/

  39. Pete H said
    “High five to Guido Fawkes for breaking the story. By the way, Leigh also used Guido’s real name in a Tweet
    David Leigh@davidleigh3
    David Leigh
    “Some clown called Harry Cole aka Guido Fawkes says I’m having a go at him because he has an embarassing tale abt me. Dream on, son”
    July 11, 2011 4:36 pm
    It appears Leigh likes to out peoples real names as a threat just the same is he did with Jeff Id!
    * * *
    Great catch Pete! Congrats!
    The difference is, by outing opponents, he thinks that any supposed dirty laundry is going to be aired. Of course, those on to him have nothing to hide.
    He does.

  40. “I was looking for evidence of bribery and corruption”
    Startling is it not, how easily any sin can be justified simply by wrapping oneself in the cloak of morality?

  41. David Leigh
    “Some clown called Harry Cole aka Guido Fawkes says I’m having a go at him because he has an embarassing tale abt me. Dream on, son”
    July 11, 2011 4:36 pm
    Not sure what Leigh is up to here – maybe a bit of pre-emptive libel avoidance – because, as even he could have checked with a few keystrokes, Harry Cole is NOT Guido Fawkes’ real name.

  42. J. Felton says:
    August 6, 2011 at 10:46 pm
    Pete H said
    “High five to Guido Fawkes for breaking the story. By the way, Leigh also used Guido’s real name in a Tweet
    Typical Guardian, wrong again, Harry is Robin to Guido’s Batman (dubbed ‘Neo Guido’ by some). Guido’s real identity is on Wiki and he’s on the telly quite a lot.

  43. Brian;
    I’m just curious after seeing your comments in a few different threads. Is there some goal you are trying to accomplish? Some actual science you want to present? Facts to discuss? Anything of any value, validity, or pertinance at all?

  44. Dave, looks like there are more than two Brians. This one is obviously a “skeptic”
    Brian says:
    August 5, 2011 at 9:21 pm
    What the hell is Climate Disruption?

  45. I just love it when trolls like Shaun and Brian “contribute” such pearls of wisdom to the discussion – it makes me feel so balanced and normal. There is nothing like rational discussion to promote understanding of a viewpoint (and I have seen nothing approaching rational discussion from those of their ilk).

  46. The Guardian is also known as the Grauniad after its record of missprints including its own name over the years. It has a falling circulation.

  47. Peter, please don’t refer to me (Brian) as a troll. Up to the last couple of day I have not posted to any climate skeptic website but it’s been an interesting exercise.
    Dave says you can only post to these sites if you have something of scientific significance to say.
    Well, from what I have read, that would rule out over 90% of comments.
    I have been following the science of carbon dioxide warming for over 25 years but am now concentrating my efforts on positive action.
    I would be very worried about peak oil too – despite what skeptics and industry PR agents say.

  48. For many in the UK, the Guardian represents the thinking of a self-appointed government sector ‘elite’, who have little idea how the real world works, but who are always ready to impose their ‘enlightened wisdom’ and theories on the ‘uninformed masses’.
    Anyone of a conservative bent and who is voluntarily seeking an apoplexy about government waste, need only open the paper on a Wednesday morning to find over 100 pages of mostly non-jobs in the government sector – ‘assistant to the assistant director’s assistant for gender awareness in the Borough of Hackney’ could be a typical example. Basically, it is this source of advertising which keeps this sad excuse for a newspaper alive.
    As for David Leigh and Climategate, there is no comparison. The former was the deliberate and unlawful hacking of private individuals for personal gain. The latter was a leak/compilation of emails by an unknown individual for no personal gain, who sought to expose the widespread deceit and abuse of science by individuals working in the public sector.

  49. Brian: Your
    Up to the last couple of day I have not posted to any climate skeptic website but it’s been an interesting exercise.
    Just started looking at the other side, after 25 years? hmmmmm. I have been looking at both sides since Rio 1992. At different times, I have been on either side of the argument. I am a regular reader and contributor at RC and other CAGW sites. I have over 20 bookmarks to these sites. (note that our host here also links to CAGW sites. try to find reciprocation on any CAGW site.)

    Dave says you can only post to these sites if you have something of scientific significance to say.
    Well, from what I have read, that would rule out over 90% of comments.

    Dave said “pertinent”. But yes, 90% with no intrinsic value is about right. Here and the AGW sites both, BTW.

    I have been following the science of carbon dioxide warming for over 25 years but am now concentrating my efforts on positive action.

    Really? 25 years of study on a highly divisive subject, and only now you look at the other arguments? And only now are you starting positive action? I have been reducing CO2 emissions for over 20 years, and I am a so-called skeptic.

    I would be very worried about peak oil too – despite what skeptics and industry PR agents say.

    There is always some imminent disaster, isn’t there? But peak oil? Its been predicted since the late 1800s, and new predictions come at about 10 year intervals. Each prediction has proven false. Lets look at the facts:
    1. The US has the worlds largest coal reserves. Newly developed Coal to liquid technology is relatively cheap, at 30-40 dollars per bbl.
    2. The US has a few hundred years of natural gas in the shales.
    3. North America has the largest oil reserves in the world, between the oil shales, oil sands and conventional oil. The Canadian oil sands, by themselves, will produce for at least 150 years, and probably more.
    To recap, you are self-admittedly: highly subjective, with little desire for an objective view; extremely slow to action; and believe in conspiratorial doomsday scenarios in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
    Sound about right?

  50. Brian, I will happily withdraw the charge of troll if you will refrain from what to me appears to be troll-like activity. What value do you think your posting of such gems as the Youtube video have. You are simply regurgitating opinion, not facts.
    I realise that engaging with you also does not contribute much to the debate. I am not a climate scientist and struggle with a lot of the more technical and statistical posts. However I feel that after a career as a professional communicator I am qualified to comment on what appears to me as irrational, ill-informed or misleading comment, and this is usually when I feel it is worth contributing.
    As for my stance – I have always questioned authority of all sorts, I believe in liberal values but from an apolitical standpoint. I have an open mind (yes,truly, an open mind) on climate issues and my interest started when I was truly scared by the prediction of runaway global warming.
    What set alarm bells ringing was when I was told that the science was settled and the consensus view was, of course, correct. The history of science tells us the closing of minds to new or alternative possibilities suggests more about the pride of “scientists”, vested interests and political motivation than it does about true scientific enquiry. Can I suggest reading “Scientific Blunders – A brief history of how wrong scientists can sometimes be” by Robert M Youngson.
    People who come on this site who deliberately set out to provoke or insult do not add anything to the debate. They waste large numbers of comments by people who feel they have to try to engage in dialogue, when the original contributors have no interest in discussion.
    Brian, are you interested in debate? If so. try to frame your comments in a less provocative manner. If you are not interested in debate, don’t waste your and our time.
    And on the subject of the Climategate e-mails, ask yourself why, after such a long time, as far as I know, the police have failed to even issue an update on the investigations into the manner of their release, let alone identify the culprit (hero?) and the reasons for the release.
    None of the subsequent enquiries into the leaks considered the science referred to in the e-mails, they looked at the motives of the individuals concerned and based their decisions on a one-sided view of the evidence. It is interesting that subsequently the Information Commissioner has ruled that the records initially requested by Steve McIntyre (which really started this whole ball rolling) should be released, and indeed have been.

  51. There are certain people in society that believe that the law does not apply to them. They believe that they have a higher moral duty and as such they are beholden to follow their own codes. Oddly enough, these very same people demand that the rest of us follow the law without question and/or accept their peculiar definitions of what is right and wrong. Many of these people are not elected representatives or leaders of accepted social groups. They act as self appointed, self indulgent messiahs. Unfortunately, it would seem that these people have moved their activities from journalism, politics and law into the field of, what some people call, climate science. When their actions are challenged they are often the first to demand the very rights that they have been undermining via their own actions. For example, they seem it right that they can have access to individuals’ private conversations but in turn we have no right to theirs. Or in climate science, they feel it right that they benefit from a castrated (or perverted) form of peer review yet demand others jump through even more hoops, or even deny the very right, to have work reviewed.
    Fortunately, most people are fair, just and transparent in their dealings. It is these later people (Such as Anthony at WUWT) who we rely to shine light upon the murky dealings of the former.

  52. It must be remembered that the Police investigation is being handled by the National Domestic Extremism Team (NDET), effectively a private Police force who are only accountable to the Association of Chief Police Officers ( ACPO) which is a private company.
    Neither ACPO or NDET are answerable to FOI requests and won’t be obliged to uphold normal Police standards.

  53. Thank you Flamenco.
    I read through all the emails and the analysis, that is more than a nail in the coffin of AGW it is a spike big enough to kill vampires. The white washes of this are as complicit as the original perps. It is clear from these emails that the team have known for 15 years that what they were doing was political and not science. History will not treat them kindly they will be not famous but infamous.

  54. It’s interesting that those with skeletons in their closets assume that everyone else does too, and by revealing information (actual names, personal info), surely some dirt will come up.. I highly respect those with the integrity to be transparent in their professional and private activity. Thank you, and my sympathy for all the crap you have to put up with.

  55. Shaun Dunne = merchant banker more English slang
    David Leigh of the Guardian
    “unlike Goodman, I was not interested in witless tittle-tattle about the royal family. I was looking for evidence of bribery and corruption”
    Seems mr Leigh can’t see the wood for the trees or is/was not aware of the law regarding bribery and corruption of police officers.
    Hope Jeff makes an official complaint to the Police and information commissioner.
    Whats the odds on any of this making to the MSM???

  56. The Green leaning Guardian is kept afloat by its very non green subsiduary http://www.autotrader.co.uk
    Ohh the irony, it preaches against the CO2 belching car that its very existance depends on.
    On its own the Guardian would be bankrupt.

  57. I find it interesting that “There are two Brians here.” At least one of them hasn’t understood anything about the horizontal drilling technology and the developments in waterless tar sand extractions, he’s still babbling about “Peak Oil.”
    Let’s see now, the U.S. is again a net natural gas exporter, after 20+ years, hmmm. 1.225mbbl of oil waiting for transport from the shale production regions of Texas alone, because the pipeline infrastructure is still being built… Nah, peak oil’s the real thing, just like CO2 runaway temperatures.

  58. Apparentley, the Guardian Media Group’s 50.1 percent stake in Trader Media Group gives it a portfolio of magazine titles, including Auto Trader, Top Marques, Bike Trader, and Truck Trader. It also owns of 32.9 percent of Emap.
    I wonder how they balance their green credentials against their greed crendentials? Profits from industry obviously pay off debts of consience in this case. I’ll never have a Guardian reader lecture me about big oil again!

  59. flamenco says:
    August 6, 2011 at 1:58 pm
    http://www.assassinationscience.com/climategate/
    My thanks, also, Flamenco. While I have a full copy of the e-mails, and I have seen various parsings of the mails, the one you posted is by far the most linear, understandable, and complete dissection I have seen. “Damning” is the word that comes to mind. Its painfully obvious that NONE of the investigations on either side of the pond looked at the e-mails in depth.

  60. Brian says:
    August 7, 2011 at 2:15 am
    Peter, please don’t refer to me (Brian) as a troll. Up to the last couple of day I have not posted to any climate skeptic website but it’s been an interesting exercise.
    Dave says you can only post to these sites if you have something of scientific significance to say.
    It’s the same brian or one just as thick. Don’t feed it.

  61. “The white washes of this are as complicit as the original perps. ”
    Completetly agree, Wayne. I remain astonished that the “enquiries” were conducted without the “enquirers” reading the whole set of emails – they even had a few presented to them to read by… Phil Jones!!!
    And the BBC “documentary” by Paul Nurse (on ‘climate skepticism’) was as shoddy a piece of crud as I have seen in a long while – complete with ‘sad music’ for shots of Phil Jones and wide eyed, mouth open shots of P Nurse being shown graphics at NASA of ‘weather’ taking place ‘exactly as the models said it would’… as if.
    Shameful.

  62. Beesaman says:
    August 7, 2011 at 8:03 am
    Apparentley, the Guardian Media Group’s 50.1 percent stake in Trader Media Group gives it a portfolio of magazine titles, including Auto Trader, Top Marques, Bike Trader, and Truck Trader. It also owns of 32.9 percent of Emap.
    I wonder how they balance their green credentials against their greed crendentials? Profits from industry obviously pay off debts of consience in this case.
    Those mags are all that is keeping the Grauniad afloat. Look at their published accounts.

  63. Hope Jeff makes an official complaint to the Police and information commissioner.
    Jeff, do it, do it.!!!!!!!

  64. Ellen: your
    What in the world do dancing squid have to do with climate?
    Dancing squid are caused by climate change? Can I add it to the List?

  65. Brian says:
    August 7, 2011 at 2:15 am
    Peter, please don’t refer to me (Brian) as a troll. Up to the last couple of day I have not posted to any climate skeptic website but it’s been an interesting exercise.
    Dave says you can only post to these sites if you have something of scientific significance to say.
    Well, from what I have read, that would rule out over 90% of comments.
    I have been following the science of carbon dioxide warming for over 25 years but am now concentrating my efforts on positive action.
    I would be very worried about peak oil too – despite what skeptics and industry PR agents say.

    Brian! For the sake of humanity! PLEASE stop using any modern convenience! You’re killing the planet!!!
    That’s what we hear from most environMENTALists. Do you agree that such a thing would be meaningful? What “positive action” do you feel would make a bit of difference regarding “global temperature”?

  66. >>The Guardian is also known as the Grauniad after its record of missprints
    >>including its own name over the years. It has a falling circulation.
    More than a falling readership, the Grauniad also has precipitous revenues. It was employed by the previous Labour government to disseminate the government’s liberal/green propaganda, and in return got every single civil service advert in the country (even though it is only read in the South East). We don’t do overt corruption in the UK, only back-door corruption.
    The ads pages have now diminished from 50 to 60, down to 5 or 6, and the Grauniad will soon be going under. Hopefully, its liberal/green propaganda machine will go under with it.
    .

  67. >>flamenco
    >>And the BBC “documentary” by Paul Nurse (on ‘climate skepticism’) was
    >>as shoddy a piece of crud as I have seen in a long while
    Hear, hear, to that one…
    If you can find a copy of this BBC Horizon documentary on the CRU’s Climategate, it is worth watching. Horizon is the BBC’s flagship documentary series, in continuous production since 1964, no less. Paul Nurse’s ‘Climate Skepticism’ edition of Horizon was the most cynical, childish and disgraceful episode ever broadcast in all of those 45 years.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00y4yql
    .

  68. RE: McIntyre: From Climategate To Guardiangate
    I have been somewhat dubious of the implication that over-aggressive newsgathering techniques attributed to NOTW and News Corp were unique and limited to those organizations. This story lends credibility to the assumption that these methods might be endemic practices in the British tabloid news industry.
    RE: Les Johnson : (August 7, 2011 at 3:22 am)
    “There is always some imminent disaster, isn’t there? But peak oil? Its been predicted since the late 1800s, and new predictions come at about 10 year intervals. Each prediction has proven false.”
    It seems like we are always moving anticipated events much closer to our own time than they actually might be. By the expectations of the 1950’s, we should have a fusion-powered society, self-sufficient colonies on Mars, and perhaps be well on the way to understanding how to accomplish faster-than-light space travel by now.
    In any case, I think may soon reach or have reached the peak *cheap* petroleum production. That is the maximum production of Oil that is easy to find and exploit. As petroleum is non-renewing, (not being replaced as fast as it is being used,) it *will* run out eventually, if we keep on using it. As raw petroleum becomes more expensive as the supply runs down; we will eventually reach a point where it becomes more economical to convert to the use of a now more-expensive, alternative energy source.
    This is not an ‘oh dear the sky is going to fall’ issue; it’s just the way things must be for all non-renewing exhaustible resource deposits.

  69. @ JohnH says:
    “The Green leaning Guardian is kept afloat by its very non green subsiduary http://www.autotrader.co.uk
    The Guardian is funded by the Scott Trust which is based in an offshore tax haven
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Trust
    The Guardian consistently runs at a financial loss, which without the trust subsidies would have been flushed down the toilet years ago.
    Guido Fawkes, aka Paul Staines, gives the Guardian and it’s editor a good going over here http://order-order.com/2011/08/03/data-journalism-guardian-style/
    Hth.

  70. Robert of Ottawa says:
    August 6, 2011 at 5:33 pm
    cirby August 6, 2011 at 11:41 am
    And for others not familiar with British society: Recall the famous “nudge-nudge, wink-wink” Monty Python sketch.
    A lot can be arranged in British society without actually directly stating the agreements .. it’s all done with a nudge-nudge, wink-wink. It allows plausible deniability. “Honest, your honour, I had no idea he would do such a stupid thing. I was just larfing around. I woz being hypothetical”

    “Is there no one who will rid me of this troublsome priest?” Yes, a fine old tradition!

  71. Some information for US bloggers who may (proudly?) believe they have the worst newspaper in the world, namely The New York Times. Well they are mistaken: the Guardian is significantly the worse of the two.
    The BBC (the biased broadcasting corporation) and the Guardian share a common belief that anyone who does not agree totally with their views on anything – but especially on AGW, big government, euro-federalism, child-centred education and restrictions on scientific freedom, – is intrinsically evil and should be silenced.
    Virtually all UK residents subsidise the Guardian whether they like it or not through the BBC licence fee (compulsory), as all BBC staff appointments are advertised uniquely, and at great expense, in the pages of the Guardian.

  72. Good God! I’ve just realized that the image at the top is not a 19th century portrait, it’s a photograph!

  73. tallbloke says:
    August 6, 2011 at 1:55 pm
    “What a lying unethical slimeball this man is.”
    tallbloke, you really should make every effort to say what you really mean. Do you intend to imply that a man who has described different ethics for different situations: that is that a journalist may hack and lie, but no others must; is a man who is in any way different to others of his ilk? My dear sir, you have missed the prime opportunity to tar all these bastards with the same brush. The bottom line: no modern “journalist” is ethical in any sense of the word as it has been commonly understood.

  74. Les Johnson : (August 7, 2011 at 3:22 am)
    “There is always some imminent disaster, isn’t there? But peak oil? Its been predicted since the late 1800s, and new predictions come at about 10 year intervals. Each prediction has proven false.”
    Les, It helps keeps the price up and allows wells that would be classed as, “non producing”, to be viable. The scare also keeps a lot of offshore guys in a job and (heaven help us!) keeps our cars and industry moving!
    Yes! I am that “Oil Industry Shrill” they keep harping on about! 😉

  75. Friends:
    Humans did not “run out” of stones, antler bone, bronze, iron, or any other ‘exhaustible resource’.
    We will not “run out” of oil for the same reasons.
    But what I want to know is. what the H*ll does ‘peak oil’ have to do with the fact that corrupt journalism assisted the cover-up of the Climategate scandal?
    Richard

  76. Richard: your
    But what I want to know is. what the H*ll does ‘peak oil’ have to do with the fact that corrupt journalism assisted the cover-up of the Climategate scandal?
    At a guess, if one is losing the argument, change the subject. But why one would change to a false and certifiably wrong subject, is beyond me.

  77. Spector: While fossil fuels are technically finite, there is demonstrably several hundred years worth of fossil fuels in North America.
    For all intents and purposes, we can consider this infinite, from our view point in time.

  78. RE: Les Johnson says: (August 8, 2011 at 2:44 am)
    “Spector: While fossil fuels are technically finite, there is demonstrably several hundred years worth of fossil fuels in North America.
    “For all intents and purposes, we can consider this infinite, from our view point in time.”

    Yes, there is no current action indicated in our life-spans except to continue the study of technical alternatives. When petroleum goes, we will need to find a new energy delivery method for transportation. I think we should understand that mankind will eventually be faced with a planet devoid of naturally concentrated rare surface resources, provided we don’t become extinct first.
    RE: “Leigh differentiated his illegal phone hacking from that practised by News of the World because his cause was noble:”
    Speaking of self-defined noble causes, I see that Jonathan May-Bowles, aka standup comic ‘Jonnie Marbles’ has been sentenced to six weeks in jail for assaulting Rupert Murdoch with a foam pie. I do not know if he still stands in jeopardy of a Contempt of Parliament charge.

  79. spector: your
    I think we should understand that mankind will eventually be faced with a planet devoid of naturally concentrated rare surface resources,
    This is contra-indicated by the evidence. ie; I am aware of no material that has been depleted globally, to the point where it was no longer available. Some material has become more expensive, and replaced with something else, but that is as close as we have come.

  80. RE: Les Johnson says: (August 8, 2011 at 7:17 am)
    “I am aware of no material that has been depleted globally”
    Quite true. All I am saying is that naturally concentrated, easy to recover, surface deposits will *eventually* be exhausted. That does not mean that we won’t be able to use more expensive artificial concentration methods to obtain the same rare resource from less productive sources.

  81. Spector:
    At August 8, 2011 at 1:31 pm you say:
    “naturally concentrated, easy to recover, surface deposits will *eventually* be exhausted.”
    I think that should be
    naturally concentrated, easy to recover, surface deposits will *eventually* be destroyed when the Sun becomes a Red Giant.
    Long before then the Guardian will have gone broke and the Climategate so-called ‘scientists’ will have become as reviled as Lysenko.
    Richard

  82. RE: Richard S Courtney says: (August 8, 2011 at 4:17 pm)
    “I think that should be naturally concentrated, easy to recover, surface deposits will *eventually* be destroyed when the Sun becomes a Red Giant.”
    I believe resources in that category, such as water, do not qualify as being ‘rare,’ unless man is soon to go extinct. I understand that Portugal is the main source of tungsten in Western Europe. There may come a period when the best source of this element might be 20th century landfills.
    RE:
    “…Climategate so-called ‘scientists’ will have become as reviled as Lysenko…”
    Judging by the language being used by a former Vice President, this may be happening now, or at least too many (in his view) may believe these scientists allowed what they thought was a ‘Noble Cause’ or a ‘Funded Cause’ to cloud their scientific judgment.

Comments are closed.