Andrew Bolt interview with Steve McIntyre from the Climate Audit blog, who exposed the infamous “hockey stick”, talking about the leaked emails that expose the warming scare.
Watch below:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Of course you are right.
Now i can hear it.
> > -=====================_??? ==_
Is FAX,s dialing sound, and 867848803 have replaced to ???, in some phase
of unZipping , or ASCII format jams, nobody has destroyed any numbers.
Ilkka Mononen says:
December 5, 2011 at 7:44 pm
The original mail files do have some changes from what was received,
notably the MIME lines in the message header. There may be later
processing too that removes or modifies the MIME header. I haven’t looked
closely at what is sent by the mail client.
The FAX/phone number is matching more than that, e.g. the time stamp for
sunrise and time checking.
Instead of a tree of individual files, most mail systems put the Email
into a data base and work on it there.
Well I could have suggested that you used a Linux system to look at the
files. (You are from Finland, right?) However, while I haven’t looked
at all the files in the Email release, I don’t believe any of them have
an attachment that will infect a computer that reads them.
What ever trouble you are having with your system, I don’t think the
files in the MIME section are causing problems.
-Ric
No, i do not use Linux.
Attacs to my, and many other computers have lasted abut a year.
They started aboyt year ago from Aller mediahouses Suomi24 Ilmastonmuutos blog.
blog http://keskustelu.suomi24.fi/debate/5433
Some activist group who want silence us “sceptics” by halting our pc.s.
New Win 7 machine with latest virus safety dont matter them,
one my friend must change to Apple.
I am also Sähköteurastaja & Myteurastaja, with name on facedook.
MIME jam, we can solve it, i can see it, its not problem, but we can
get a clear explanation,.
Attacs from IP 169.***… to 172 .** if i remember, lost my archieves yesterday.
And case “AAAAAAAAAAAAAA” to mime decryption we got also FAX and
phone numbers, where the “message was sended” , …. `?
“IME \@ur momisugly “d MMMM, yyyy” 2 July, 1997
NOTE ASCII unicode synbols!
Ilkka.
Re: Statement of European Scientists on Actions to Protect Global Climate
Dear Colleague,
Attached is a draft Statement that has been informally drawn up by Joe Alcamo, Rob Swart and Mike Hulme working in Europe on climate issues. Its main purpose is to bolster or increase support for controls of emissions of greenhouse gases in European countries in the period leading up to Kyoto. The Statement is intended to be from European scientists, and is aimed towards governments, citizen groups, and media in European countries. The statement has specific goals in specific countries:
In European countries where the government supports controls of greenhouse emissions: In these countries, certain government ministries and other climate stakeholders in the country are trying to get the government to retreat on its policies before Kyoto. Here, the Statement is intended to be used by the government and citizen groups via the national media to support its position.
In European countries where the government does not support controls of greenhouse emissions: Here, the Statement is intended to help citizen groups and other stakeholders in the country to convince the government to support controls of emissions.
On behalf of my colleagues, may I request the following from you at this stage:
Your suggestions for changes in text.
Your recommendations for scientists to contact for commenting on the draft.
Having agreed on a form of words by consulting with a small number of colleagues (a process I am co-ordinating for the UK), we shall proceed to invite about 10 key scientists in the field in Europe (e.g. Crutzen, Houghton, Bolin, etc.) to sponsor the statement. Having gained this prestige endorsement, we shall then endeavour to invite as many additional scientists as possible (100s if not 1000s) to indicate their support for the statement which shall then be presented to the media at a press conference ‘ … with the support of “n” European scientists.’
Please reply as soon as possible at the below address. We look forward to your comments.
With best wishes,
Mike Hulme
email: m.hulme@ur momisuglyuea.ac.uk
fax: 01603 507784
phone: 01603 593162
and
Joseph Alcamo
Rob Swart
Statement of European Scientists
on Actions to Protect Global Climate
In 1992 the nations of the world took a significant step to protect global climate by signing the Framework Convention on Climate Change. This year, at the coming Climate Summit in Kyoto*, they have the chance to take an even more important step. It is our opinion that in Kyoto the nations of the world should agree upon immediate and substantive action to ensure the long term protection of global climate by controlling the current increase in global greenhouse gas emissions.
Our opinion is bolstered by the assessment of scientific knowledge carried out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which recently published a voluminous report on its findings. The report noted:
Global mean surface air temperature has increased by around 0.3 to 0.60C since the late 19th century.
Recent years have been the warmest since 1860.
Global sea level has risen between 10 and 25 cm over the past 100 years and much of the rise may be related to the increase in global mean temperature.
The IPCC also maintained that the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate, and that climate is expected to continue to change in the future. These changes will bring with them further increases in sea level, the transformation of forest- and other ecosystems, modifications of crop yield, shifts in the geographic range of carriers of disease of plants, animals and humans, and many other impacts. Some of these impacts may be seen as positive, such as the possible increase in rainfall and crop yield in certain dry regions; and some of these impacts may be adapted to, as in the case of building dikes to protect against slowly rising sea level (where they can be afforded). But many, if not most, impacts of climate change will increase risks to society and nature. Furthermore, many of these impacts will be irreversible. As the IPCC has reported, vulnerability to climate change is of particular importance to people living on arid or semi-arid land, in low-lying coastal areas, in water-limited or flood-prone regions, or on small islands. Risks to nature will be significant in the many areas where natural ecosystems cannot quickly adapt to changing climate, or where they are already under stress from environmental pollution or other factors.
Because of these risks, we find it important for nations to develop long-term climate protection goals, as in setting limits on the increase of global temperature and sea level. Equally important, we recommend that European and industrialized nations use long-term climate protection goals as a guide to determining short-term emission targets. This approach has been adopted, for example, by the European Union and the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS).
Some may say that action to control emissions should be delayed because of the scientific uncertainties of climate change and its impact. We reply that the risks and irreversibility of many climate impacts require “precautionary measures to anticipate, prevent, or minimize the causes of climate change”, as clearly stated in the Framework Convention on Climate Change.
We also recognize that there are economic arguments for delaying the control of emissions in Europe and elsewhere. However, after carefully examining the question of timing of emission reductions, we find the arguments against delay to be more compelling. First, delaying action could shift an unfair burden for more severe reductions of emissions to future generations. Second, delaying action will lead to a greater accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and therefore make it more difficult to prevent future climate change when action is finally taken.
Rather than delay, we strongly urge governments in Europe and other industrialized countries to accede to controls of greenhouse emissions as part of a Kyoto agreement. We further believe that some of these emission controls can be achieved at little or no net cost through improvements in the efficiency of energy systems and faster introduction of renewable energy.
As to a quantitative goal for controlling emissions, we believe that the European Union proposal is consistent with long term climate protection. This proposal would reduce by 15% the total collective greenhouse gas emissions from industrialized countries (so-called Annex I countries) by the year 2010 (relative to year 1990). Although stronger emission reductions will be needed in the future, we see the -15% target as a positive first step “to prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” and to lessen risks to society and nature. Such substantive action is needed now.
*Third Conference of Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change, Kyoto, Japan, December, 1997.
Version: 4
Date: TIME \@ur momisugly “d MMMM, yyyy” 2 July, 1997
PAGE 3
PAGE 3
An case “AAAAAAAAA” deserves us a part of Mike Hulmes emails.
The oters are in other directories.
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=507784
Then Case “AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA”
Brings us forward, some MIME data, and some data whitch seems not to be MIME format.
Ilkka.
Forgotten!
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=2803.txt&search=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Ilkka Mononen says:
December 6, 2011 at 12:31 am
This is likely just a MS Word document. Those are binary files and have numeric control information. I’m not going to look into what these are, if you Google something like |”microsoft word” page control value| you might find them (don’t include the vertical bars).
As for the AAAAAA… – okay, where is BASE64 described? See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base64 – Note that “A” represents 6 zero bits and “/” represents 6 one bits, note my mention of them in http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/01/steve-mcintyre-on-the-bolt-report/#comment-818631
All you’re searching for are for BASE64 encoded files that have blocks of zero bytes. Lots of uncompressed binary files do that.
http://www.opinionatedgeek.com/dotnet/tools/base64decode/ – Handy little decoder. If you use it, you have to remember that 4 BASE64 characters represent 3 unencoded characters, so if you pick up some BASE64 text at the wrong offset, you’ll get junk from the decoder.
E.g. “… Mike Hulme ……” encodes as “Li4uIE1pa2UgSHVsbWUgLi4uLi4u”. Note that “…” encodes as “Li4u”. If you start decoding with i4uI…, 4uIE…, or uIE1…, you will get junk.
Conversely, if you want to search for “Mike Hulme” in BASE64 text, you have to search for three different substrings.
The short answer is – you’re looking a MS Word documents without MS Word. You should use MS Word to looking at the “metadata” – the information in the file about who wrote it and when. There’s very little interesting looking at BASE64 encodings of MS Word files other than finding them to decode and give to MS Word.
Maybe they are seaching important emails with supercomputers?
http://joannenova.com.au/2011/12/skeptics-leap-from-planes-to-see-if-zombie-media-will-finally-notice-climategate-emails/
I hae something like this in my ms Word.
Somebody want that i read it, but it´s beyond my competence.
“Agenda 2nd teleconference Program Committee Expert Meeting on Emission Scenarios (EM- ES)
Date: 30 August 2 – 3 PM Central European time
1. Opening EM-ES2/DOC.1
2. Approval of Agenda
3. Discussion Draft Program EM-ES2/DOC.2
a. Deliverables – expected results
b. Structure and sessions, incl suggestions IPCC chair
c. Speakers and chairpersons
NB mail from IPCC chair EM-ES/DOC.2 b
4. Note on Participants EM-ES2/.DOC.3
a. Criteria for selection
b. Suggestions for names so far
5. Other matters
NB Chair will ask Jason Samenow EPA 1 202 343 9327 and Anita Meier, + 31 30 274 2639 to join
6. Next steps: update planning EM-ES2/DOC.4
a. deadline invitations letter out
b. deadline abstracts papers/backrground docs?
7. Closure
8. Francisco, Leo, Jason, Anita and others who may wish to join in will discuss logistics
Somebody wants to give me massive dataset, part of Word docs, cannot open all, yet.
Language unknown?
“*Sea Level Rise Potential from Glacier and Ice Cap area and volume distributions* Sarah C.B. Raper^1 , Roger J. Braithwaite^2 . ^1 Alfred Wegener Institute Foundation for Polar and Marine Research, D-27515 Bremerhaven, Germany. ^2 Geography Department, Universityof Manchester, ManchesterM13 9PL, England. INDEX TERMS 1827 Glaciology 1863 Snow and Ice 3210 Modeling 3309 Climatology 4556 Sea Level Variations KEY WORDS Glaciers, Ice Caps, Climate, Sea Level, Global Warming 1828 *Abstract* * * Projections of sea-level rise from glaciers and ice caps for the next century and beyond should be based on an assessment of the ice available for melting. Projections to date are based on all regions except Greenlandand Antarctica, yet no sound estimates for this volume of ice and its potential for sea level rise are evident in the literature. An ice cap data set is compiled allowing the separate treatment of glacier area coverage data. Glacier inventory data are comprehensive enough in some regions to allow the estimation of glacier size distributions. The differences in the distributions are related to a metric of the regional topography, allowing glacier size distributions to be estimated on a 1^o latitude longitude grid of glacier containing cells. Appropriate volume-area scaling for glaciers and for ice caps gives global estimates of glacier and ice cap volumes by size class. This leads to an estimate of the total ice volume of 0.088 ±0.007 10^6 km^3 and a sea-level rise equivalent of 0.243 ±0.014 m. The glaciers and ice caps contribute 41% and 59% to these estimates respectively. These values relate to a nominal reference period of 1961-1990. *1. Introduction* * * The sea level rise chapter (Church and Gregory, 2001) in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Third Assessment Report (TAR) presents future glacier and ice cap (GSIC) melt based on the work of Gregory and Oerlemans (1998) and Van der Wal and Wild (2001). The basis for projections of melt over the next century and beyond should be an assessment of the volume of ice available for melt. Meier and Bahr (1996) estimate a total glacier and ice cap area of 0.68 10^6 km^2 , a volume of 0.18 +/- 0.04 10^6 km^3 , and sea level equivalent of 0.50 +/- 0.10 m. However, the projections in the IPCC and elsewhere exclude the glaciers and ice caps on the margins of Greenlandand the Antarctic Peninsula. Dyurgerov and Meier (1997) give an area for the GSICs outside Greenlandand Antarcticaof 0.54 10^6 km^2 , but no associated volume and SLR potential are evident in the above cited literature. The purpose of this paper is to estimate this GSIC volume and the SLR potential, thus giving a firmer foundation for GSIC melt projections. *2. Data and methods* * * Ice coverage is taken from the 1^o latitude longitude gridded data set of Cogley (1998). Outside Antarcticaand Greenlandthere are 1551 grid cells which contain ice cover. To calculate ice volume from area it is necessary separate the glacier ice from the ice cap ice and to estimate the size distribution of each. We have compiled an ice cap data set listing latitude, longitude and area. The data set is based mainly on the atlas of Kotlyakov et al. (1997). Individual ice cap areas were identified in the atlas and added to the ice cap data set. This area was then subtracted from the Cogely data set. Ice cap location and area for Severnayay Zemlya and a few other places were taken from data obtained from the National Snow and IceDataCenter(1999); this data set is otherwise known as the World Glacier Monitoring Service (WGMS) data set (Haeberli et al.1999). The resulting glacier and ice cap areas are 0.401 10^6 km^2 and 0.121 10^6 km^2 respectively. The glacier size distribution cannot be obtained directly from the WGMS data set because the data coverage is inadequate in many regions (Bahr and Meier, 1996; Van der Wal and Wild, 2001). Normalized glacier size distributions for seven selected regions with good coverage are presented in Figure 1. Linear fits to the data have positive slope in two cases, negative slope in four cases and one slope close to zero. We associate these slope differences with regional topographic differences. Using the National Geodetic Survey thirty second (30’) topography data set, TOPO30, we calculate a standard deviation (SD) for each point and its adjacent grid cells (the number of adjacent grid cells used in the SD calculation is discussed below). This gives a 120×120 data set of SDs for each 1^o grid square in which glaciers occur. It is clear from sample comparisons of glacier location in a 1^o grid square and the 30’ elevations that the glacier locations are well represented by the highest elevations. The relevant average SD in each grid square is therefore identified as an average over the glacier area, which is assumed to be at the highest elevations. We made a study of the effect of the change with latitude of the resolution in the longitudinal direction in the TOPO30 data on the SDs and any systematic bias that this might have on our results. Initially, the SDs were calculated for each elevation point using its 8 adjacent grid cells (9 elevation points contributing to each SD). We identified two opposing effects on the SDs of decreasing resolution towards the equator. The first effect is a smoothing of the topography tending to decrease the SDs. The second, sometimes opposing effect, results from the greater distance between the mid points of adjacent cells in the longitudinal direction. We found the strength of this second effect to be dependant on the ‘roughness’ of the topography making it hard to apply a correction. Instead we sought to minimize the effect by repeating the SD calculation using each elevation point with the two adjacent points aligned at that longitude. The resulting global mean area and volume distributions based on the 9 and 3 point SDs are practically identical. An explanation for this is the systematic declination of the Equilibrium Line Altitude (ELA) with increasing latitude. Lower latitude glaciers must necessarily be on the top of high mountains (higher SDs) whereas higher latitude glaciers can be situated at ever lower elevations (lower SDs). Thus any remaining latitudinal bias in the 3 point SDs which we adopt in this paper is very unlikely to give a systematic bias to our results. In Figure 2, regional average topographic SDs are plotted against the glacier size distribution regression slopes (denoted b) from Figure 1. We conclude from linear regression that the SDs are a good predictor for the area regression slopes, accounting for 90% of the variance. High SDs indicate steep topography and a relative large area associated with small glaciers whereas low SDs indicate low topography and a relatively large area associated with large glaciers. For each glacier square in the gridded data set we use the topographic SD to estimate the glacier size distribution slope (b) where b = f(SD) = a+ bSD (1) andaand bare the intercept and slope given in Figure 2. Fractional total areas in each area size bin are calculated by insuring that the total area across all bins is equal to unity. The glacier areas, A, in each bin are assumed to be (2^n – 2^n-1 )/2 km^2 , where n are successive bin numbers running from n=2 to 12. A in the first bin is assumed to be 0.5 km^2 . When following this procedure the number of glaciers in each size bin is not integer. This is a tolerable result of the statistical nature of the procedure. However for realism a lower limit for the allowable fraction of a glacier in the largest area bin for each grid cell is required. For a central estimate we take this fractional value to be f=1/3. We image then that 3 adjacent 1^o grid cells could share this glacier. By an iterative procedure, starting if necessary with bin number 12, the glacier area in successively smaller bins is set to zero if the fractional area is below f. On each iteration, before testing for f, we insure that the total area across all bins is equal to unity. This procedure limits the size of the largest glacier in a grid cell, and this size is related to the total area in the grid cell. To explore
the uncertainties associated with the choice of fwe repeat the calculation with f= 1/4 and f= 1/2. Another set of uncertainties are those related to the regression parameters aand b. We explore four options: i all the slopes b are more positive, by using a= 0.0312 + 0.0068 ii all the slopes b are more negative, by using a= 0.0312 – 0.0068 iii the dependence of b on the SD is greater, by using b= -0.000344 + 5.3e-05 iv the dependence of b on the SD is smaller, by using b= -0.000344 – 5.3e-05. These alternative relationships are shown in Figure 2. Having estimated the number of glaciers in each size bin, the glacier ice volume is estimated using scaling methods following Chen and Ohmura (1990), and Bahr et /al./ (1997). We use V = c A ^g (2) ^ whereV is the glacier volume associated with the each glacier size bin area A , c=0.0285 m^3-2 ^g and g= 1.36 as given by Bahr et al. (1997). For ice caps we assume a parabolic form from Paterson(1994) where L = (A 10^6 / ?)^0.5 H = 3.4 (A 10^6 / ?)^0.25 V = 2.0 ? H L^2 / (3.0 10^9 ) (3), hereL, A, H and V are the radius, area, maximum thickness and volume of an ice cap with circular plan. This is equivalent to V µA ^1.25 . However, this is likely to be a maximum estimate of V since most ice caps are not perfectly circular. In particular, the largest ice cap, nearly 20 10^3 km^2 on Novaya Zemlyais long and narrow. To make a lower bound estimate of the ice cap volumes we assume V µ2 ((A/2)^1.25 ). *3. Discussion of distributions and uncertainties* * * The resulting area and volume distributions for glaciers and ice caps are presented in Figure 3. The five estimates of the glacier area size distribution, by definition, all add to the same total area of 0.401 10^6 km^2 . The largest uncertainty is related to the uncertainty in the mean value of the slopes b, options i and ii. The total number of glaciers considered ranges from 137,948 for option i to 195,773 for option ii. These glacier numbers are critically dependant on the assumption that the smallest glacier size is 0.5 km. The differences in glacier area distribution have a significant effect on the resulting total glacier volume because of the power law relationship between area and volume. Allowing a smaller/larger fractional glacier area in the largest bin in each grid cell (f=0.25 versus f=0.5) results in proportionally less/more small glaciers and more/less large glaciers. Thus the total volume is greater when f=0.25. The largest total volume is when all slopes b are more positive (i) and there is relatively more area in larger glaciers. More/less dependence of b on the grid cell SD (options iii and iv) have a lesser effect on total volume. The total ice cap area is 0.121 10^6 km^2 . The volume versus area relationships for glaciers and icecaps (equations 2 and 3) are such that ice cap volume is less than glacier volume for the same area. However, because the ice cap distribution peaks at greater bin number (14) compared to the glacier distribution (9), ice caps contribute more to the total volume than the glaciers. *5. Conclusions* * * The analysis is based on glacier and ice cap areas of 0.401 10^6 km^2 and 0.121 10^6 km^2 respectively which excludes those of Greenlandand Antarctica. Combining the considered uncertainties in quadrature we compute glacier and ice cap volumes of 0.036 ± 0.006 10^6 km^3 and 0.052 ±0.004 10^6 km^3 respectively. Assuming an oceanic area of 3.62 10^8 km^2 , these volumes translate into a total sea-level rise equivalent of 0.243 ±0.014 m; 0.010 ±0.016 m being from the glaciers and 0.142 ± .0123 m from the ice caps. The latter values estimate the potential future sea level rise from glaciers and ice caps (excluding Greenland and Antarctica) if all the ice in them were to melt. We relate these estimates to a nominal reference period of 1961-1990. Acknowledgments The authors thank Tim Osborn and Christopher Zweck for helpful discussions. References Bahr, D.B., M.F. Meier, and S.D. Peckham (1997) The physical basis of glacier volume-area scaling. /Journal of Geophysical Research, 102/, 20,355–20,362. Chen, J., and A. Ohmura (1990) Estimation of alpine glacier water resources and their change since the 1879s. /IAHS Publication 193/, 127–135. Church, J.A., and J.M. Gregory, P. Huybrechts, M. Kuhn, K. Lambeck, M.T. Nhuan, D. Qin, P.L. Woodworth(2001) Changes in sea level. (In) /Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, /(eds. J.T. Houghton et al.), CambridgeUniversityPress, Cambridge, U.K., pp. 639–693. Cogley, J. G. 1998.GGHYDRO Release 2.2. ftp://ftp.trentu.ca/pub/gghyro. Accessed June 1998. Gregory, J.M., and J. Oerlemans (1998) Simulated future sea level rise due to glacier melt based on regionally and seasonally resolved temperature changes. /Nature, 391/, 474–476. Haeberli, W., H. Bösch, K. Scherler, G. Østrem and C. C. Wallén, (1989) /World glacier inventory: status 1988/. IAHS(ICSI) – UNEP – UNESCO, Paris. Kotlyakov, V.M. /et al/., (1997) /World atlas of snow and ice resources/.RussianAcademyof Sciences, Instituteof Geography, 392pp. Meier, M.F., and D.B. Bahr (1997) Counting glaciers.Use of scaling methods to estimate the number and size distribution of the glaciers of the world. (In) /Glaciers, Ice Sheets and Volcanoes: A Tribute to Mark F. Meier/, (ed. S.C. Colbeck), Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory Special Report 96-27, Hanover, NH, pp. 89–94. National Snow and IceDataCenter, (1999) /World Glacier Inventory/.World Glacier Monitoring Service and National Snow and Ice Data Center/World Data Center for Glaciology. Boulder, CO. Digital media. Paterson, W. S. B. (1994) /The//physics of glaciers/. Oxford, Pergamon, 480 pp.** Van der Wal, R.S.W., and M. Wild (2001) Modeling the response of glaciers to climate change by applying volume-area scaling in combination with a high-resolution GCM. /Climate Dynamics, 18/, 359–366. _ _ Figure Captions_ *_ * Fig. 1: Fraction of regional glacier area plotted against glacier size bin numbers. The first size bin contains the factional area accounted for by glaciers of area < 1 km^2 . Bin boundaries are given by 2^n , where n = 0 for the upper boundary of the first bin. Fig. 2: Area regression slopes from Figure 1 plotted against regional average topographic standard deviation (m). Also shown are a linear fit to the data points (solid) with correlation coefficient r; regression lines assuming the fitted intercept a± one standard deviation (dotted lines) and regression lines assuming the fitted slope b± one standard deviation (dot-dashed lines). Fig. 3: Histograms of glacier and ice cap (a) area and (b) volume plotted against area size bins. The size in each bin is the average area of the bin boundaries given in Figure 1 caption. For clarity the glacier results are plotted with lines and symbols. Results are for various values of f, uncertainty options i-iv and high and low estimates of ice cap volume as described in the text. Figure 1 [top] Figure 2 [top] Figure 3 [top] *_ * *_ * * *
Timestamp from case “AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA”
FOIA Grepper HTML to Notebook.txt
Date: TIME \@ur momisugly “d MMMM, yyyy” 2 July, 1997
PAGE 3
PAGE 3
FOIA Grepper HTML to &H, blancos & 3* CR added by me.
44 61 74 65 3a 20 13 20 54 49 4d 45 20 5c 40 20 93 64 20 4d
4d 4d 4d 2c 20 79 79 79 79 94 20 14 32 20 4a 75 6c 79 2c 20
31 39 39 37 15 0d 0a 13 50 41 47 45 20 14 33 15 0d 0a 0d 0a
13 50 41 47 45 20 14 33 15 0d 0a
How do you see the timestamp at the bottom of the “AAAAAAA”
message?
I,m using Firefox, Finland regional settings, and timestamp
seems to me ASCII unicode chars.
Just waked up, and find on my mind that Rick mentioned “timestamp”.
Maybe we can use timestamp for searching FOIA emails by date.
Ilkka
http://www.string-functions.com/string-hex.aspx
Date: TIME \@ur momisugly “d MMMM, yyyy” 2 July, 1997
Don´t match to FOIA grepper, but it must, one way or another?
Why there are “d MMMM, yyyy” twice.
Have i lost my mind, or lost my way.
Fighting against Windmills?, i´m doing that all the time!
Date: TIME \@ur momisugly “d MMMM, yyyy” 2 July, 1997
PAGE 3
PAGE 3
Ilkka
And i found some IPCC material, EM-ES .
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=EM-ES
More files at my homepage.
If somebody is intrested.
https://sites.google.com/site/myteurastaja/home/dataa
FOIA findings:
https://sites.google.com/site/myteurastaja/home/foia-findings
Wow, people posting here actually worship dah Bolta?? Yes his blog site gets a lot of hits. But its widely known as almost as good as Piers Ackermans as a place to watch the nut-baggers froth and spray on whatever the current topic is, at the same time as they express their undying love and respect for the blogger.
on ratings:
The series debuted with 163,000 while the encore received 123,000 viewers. The debut was narrowly beaten by Insiders, which received 172,000 viewers. Bolt stated on his blog he would like to beat Insiders. He reached this goal in his second episode, reaching 174,000 viewers, beating Insiders with 166,000.Ratings for the show declined to 136,000 viewers for the third episode and 131,000 for the encore. This compared to 207,000 for Insiders. Insiders has defeated The Bolt Report in every subsequent week. The Bolt Report remains at the bottom of the free-to-air ratings for its timeslot.
Insiders has been much more factually informative since they dumped Bolt. More analysis and less nasty crap.
Speaking of “frothing and spraying”…
Just as Rick says.
Date: TIME \@ur momisugly “yyyy”d MMMM, 2 July, 1997
Is the time stamp Format, time tics from DOS birthday, maybe same way at UNIX,
Timestamp tells us the system, and that we can see is WIN stamp,
TIME \@ur momisugly “yyyy”d MMMM, another (UNIX), our system do not recogsize it..
Seems that MIME Device uses time stamp to generate ID to backupfile, nnnnnn.txt
it is sec.s as Ric show us. Time from DOS 1,o birth as units, called “time tics”.
Its universal time, same at all WIN computers.
It is tied to GMT & UTC …….
i´m loosing my mind, i´ts too obvious.
Searching by timetics:
867848803
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=867848803
20 hits
7 Jul 1997 11:39:41 am
Is this (867848803) the same time as above?
Widening time scale, by disabling last decimals, 86784
More hits.
And what we have found.
Those mails that have been delivered by mime device, the bacups, and sending time.
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=86784
I check new mails for a while.
Ilkka
Epoc converter.
Yes, it is UNIX time stamp.
Mon 7
Day 2
Yr 1997
Hr 13
Min 6
Sec 43
Generates 867848803 UNIX Timetics, used .867848803.txt “backup”.
And what have we found, a message itself, funny!
Maybe Epoc converter can be used to search empty MIME
files backups.
http://www.epochconverter.com/
Ilkka.
And the result follows.
Proof of data manipulation.
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=4579.txt&search=85030
I found confidental IPCC messages.
“This message and any files transmitted with it may contain confidential
information and is solely intended for the addressee(s). Any unauthorized
disclosure or actions taken in reliance on it are forbidden. If you have
received this message in error, please delete it and notify the sender.
The employer of the sender does not guarantee that the information sent
and/or received is correct and does not accept any liability for damages
related thereto.”
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=1770.txt&search=c4EBBE45BDFC9551D
Can´t open coded message yet, are they MIME format, looks like they are, i tried
also with diffrent charsets on Base64 decoder?
Is Jim or anyboby else intrested?
Ilkka.
Updatet FOIA findings.
Connection between climate”scientists” and some kind of religion.
https://sites.google.com/site/myteurastaja/climate-science-jonh-stott-religion
All the files and the text are from CRU,s FOIA files.
Ilkka.
Kevin Trenbeth.
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=497+1333+
Some progress ???
It is now Word document.
“University of East Anglia
Climatic Research Unit Dear Colleagues Thursday, 23 July 1998
now and that will be used in the future to explore (anthropogenic) climate change detection and future climate scenarios.
At a subsequent, brief meeting attended by myself, Paul Valdes and Nick Shackleton in Cambridge, we decided that the novel component of a new proposal could best be represented by building it around the Hadley Centre Aims and the Unified Model. Paul and I then met at Bracknell with John Mitchell, Simon Tett and Peter Cox to discuss the Hadley Centre interest and to decide whether true mutual benefit was achievable under this scenario. I am pleased to report that the suggestion was enthusiastically endorsed by them and we have moved on to plan an initial proposal drafting along these lines.
The purpose of this note is to inform you and, through you, the wider palaeoclimate community of this effort and to assure you that your full participation in this effort is requested. For practical reasons only, a small drafting team was suggested at our original London meeting. This is made up of, along with myself, Paul Valdes (Reading), John Lowe (RHUL), Nick Shackleton (Cambridge), Alan O’Niell (Reading), Phil Gibbard (Cambridge), and Rick Battarbee (UCL). These are supplemented with Simon Tett and Peter Cox (Hadley Centre). When we have something on paper, the intention is to solicit comments from a wider ‘consultative team’ made up of David Warrilow (DETR), Geoff Bolton (Edinburgh), David Peel (BAS), Sandy Tudhope (Edinburgh) and Frank Oldfield (PAGES) and others.
At this point, it would not be productive to go into greater detail about the logic and discussions that occurred at the various meetings, other than to say that there was a concensus that there must be a clear focus on ‘state of the art’ modelling and the palaeowork envisaged must be justified within the context of this (and future) climate modelling.
Note that we are heading for a submission by the end of October! This information should hopefully get some sort of common discussion going. I will get back to everyone in due course.
Best wishes
Keith Briffa”
MIME SOF is DQONDQIU.
*
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA0NDQ0NDQ1UaHVyc2RheSwgMjMgSnVseSAxOTk4DQ1EZWFy
FOIA Grepper.
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=2100.txt&search=Collslet.doc
Word documet.
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=0986486371.txt&search=+————–
From: Mike Hulme
To: s.torok
Subject: Fwd: RE: kyoto survey – press inquiry from the THES
Date: Thu Apr 5 11:59:31 2001
Simon,
Could you – or Vanessa – buy a THES today from the paper shop and check this out. I would
quite like to draft a short letter to THES as suggested by Steve. But I need to see how
the issue was presented in this week’s issue.
Thanks,
Mike
From: “Farrar, Steve”
To: ‘Mike Hulme’
Subject: RE: kyoto survey – press inquiry from the THES
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 09:45:33 +010 ???
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Dear Mike,
thanks for that. I feel terrible but despite the pain it cost to reply to the survey,
the deadline has now passed. We had such a high response rate that we decided to run the
piece in this week’s paper while the issue of the US withdrawl from the protocol was
still high in everyone’s mind. So I cannot include your responses. However, you make a
number of very significant points, not least your reply to question 2 on the strength of
the evidence and the political framework outlined in your final sentences. I wonder –
and I know this is pushing it – whether you might consider rearranging some of these
sentences to form a brief letter to the editor for the following week’s paper? I would
like this issue to stay alive in the THES and allow the paper to play a small role in
persuading as many scientists as possible to take part in a scientific/political debate
that may contribute to influencing those people who *can* change things. Not an original
objective, I know, but the THES does have a fairly unique position within the academic
community and hence a responsibility. Anyhow, sorry for the bad news
best wishes
Steve
***********************
Steve Farrar
Science Reporter
Times Higher Education Supplement
66-68 East Smithfield
London E1W 1BX
United Kingdom
[1]www.thes.co.uk
Tel: (44) ???
Fax: (44) ???
—–Original Message—–
From: Mike Hulme [[2]mailto:???@uea.ac.uk]
Sent: 04 April 2001 19:57
To: Farrar, Steve
Subject: Re: kyoto survey – press inquiry from the THES
Steve,
I hate these sort of questionnaires since Y or N answers are barely
adequate. However, I’ve given it a go with some other comments ………….
(by the way, Prof. Trevor Davies is Head of my School here at UEA – I am
only Director of a Centre within the School, albeit a highly relevant one!).
You can quote me if appropriate, but let me know before hand.
Mike
At 12:30 02/04/01 +010 ???, you wrote:
>Dear Mike,
>
>hope you’re well. I am conducting a survey of heads of UK university
>departments of environmental science for the Times Higher Education
>Supplement. I am keen to explore views concerning the United States and
>the Kyoto agreement. I wonder if you could answer the following Yes/No
>questions when you get a moment. Note, I will not identify you unless you
>specifically state that you do not mind being quoted.
>
>I do hope you can help
>
>all the bets
>
>Steve
>
>1: Do you believe human activities are at least in part responsible for
>driving global climate change?
YES
>2: Do you feel the evidence for this is sufficiently strong to start
>reducing emissions?
NO – to reduce emissions requires more evidence than that humans are
altering climate. We need to know something about the potential risks
associated with future climate change, whether these risks can be minimised
through adaptive action and then have some socially negotiated basis for
deciding about the necessity and extent of desirable emissions
reductions. On none of these issues do we have a good basis to work
from. The precautionary principle, if chosen, would imply start reducing
emissions now – but I am not convinced a blind application of the
precautionary principle in this case is the most appropriate instrument.
>3: Do you think the measures proposed at Kyoto were too weak, correct, or
>too strong?
The 5.2% emissions reduction by 2010 by Annex I countries were not driven
by science but by real-politik. By definition they were the best
achievable. The real issue however is not about target setting – it’s
about the dynamics of change worldwide in energy technologies, investment
strategies, consumer and community behaviour and aspirations, etc. It is
*these* things that in the end will deliver a safer climate – not the
Protocol per se. More attention should be directed at the diverse and
myriad set of actions needed to decarbonise our societies.
>4: Are you disappointed that George Bush has abandoned the Kyoto agreement?
YES – but it is too early to say that Kyoto is dead. The USA does not have
the power of veto – and Bush will have to propose some climate management
strategy of his own. We wait and see.
>5: Should the rest of the world press on with the agreement without the
>United States?
Probably YES. This can be achieved and should provide valuable lessons in
global climate management which we can learn from in the long-term.
>6: Do you feel the US should be allowed to count carbon sequestration
>measures such as planting new forests towards any carbon emissions
>reduction target?
YES. The UK are doing it in their national climate change programme so why
not the USA?
>7: Are you optimistic that there will be a new emissions control agreement
>within the next 12 months?
A ‘new’ one? We haven’t got one yet. I would think maybe not in the next
12 months, but the critical issues about global climate management will be
clearer.
>8: Should the Kyoto preliminary targets be watered down to gain the
>Americans’ support?
NO. If the USA don’t like them, let them not ratify or propose a strategy
of their own.
>If you would like to add any comments to this survey as to the
>implications of the US’s rejection of Kyoto for the planet, what UK can do
>about it or what role scientists can play in this debacle, please do so.
In a literal sense the implications for global climate are trivial – what
will affect the course of global climate (and only then climate beyond
about 2030 – up until then climate is pretty much pre-determined by inertia
in the system) in the long-run are the effects of cumulative decisions
taken by many, many people/governments/businesses over the next 10-20
years. Let’s not kid ourselves that the USA President is more powerful
than he would like to think. The planetary system is much bigger than one
4-year term of a US president.
The UK is playing a key role both within the negotiating machinery of the
FCCC, in pioneering new scientific analyses, and in working out new forms
of adapting to climate change. This momentum in the UK is not going to be
halted by Bush.
Scientists need to be there to point out the long-term nature of the
problem – it is not a classic political issue where a one-term government
can solve or worsen the problem. Scientists need to point out that for
long-term planetary management we need new analytical tools, new criteria
for investment decisions, a new appreciation of the concept of global
citizenship. What climate change forces us to do is to think about the
influence we are having on the quality of life for the next generation but
one – not our own generation or even our children’s
generation. Conventional politics is not a system geared up for this
challenge.
>***********************
>Steve Farrar
>Science Reporter
>Times Higher Education Supplement
>66-68 East Smithfield
>London E1W 1BX
>United Kingdom
>[3]www.thes.co.uk
>Tel: (44) ???
>Fax: (44) ???
>
>
>—————————————————————————-
>This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended solely for the
>intended recipient. It may contain confidential and/or privileged
>information. If you are not the intended recipient, any reliance on, use,
>disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail or
>attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in
>error, please notify the sender by telephone +44 ???and delete
>the e-mail and all attachments immediately.
>
>If you wish to know whether the statements and opinions contained in this
>email are endorsed by News International or its associated companies (NI
>Group), or wish to rely on them, please request written confirmation from
>Corporate Affairs. In the absence of such confirmation NI Group accepts no
>responsibility or liability.
>
>NI Group reserves the right to monitor emails in accordance with the
>Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practice) (Interception of
>Communications) Regulations 2000.
>
>[NI Group does not accept liability for any virus introduced by this
>e-mail or any attachment and you are advised to use up-to-date virus
>checking software.]
>
>News International plc is the holding company for the News International
>group of companies and is registered in England No 81701, with its address
>at 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY
*****************************************************************************
Dr Mike Hulme
Executive Director
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
School of Environmental Sciences
University of East Anglia
Norwich NR4 7TJ
UK
tel: +44 ???(or 593900)
fax: +44 ???
mobile: ???
email: ???@uea.ac.uk
web site: [4]www.tyndall.uea.ac.uk
************************************************************************************
The Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
…. integrated research for sustainable responses ….
The Tyndall Centre is a new research initiative funded by three UK
Research Councils – NERC, ESRC, EPSRC – with support from the DTI.
************************************************************************************
—————————————————————————-
This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended solely for the intended recipient.
It may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended
recipient, any reliance on, use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of
this e-mail or attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in
error, please notify the sender by telephone +44 ???and delete the e-mail and
all attachments immediately.
If you wish to know whether the statements and opinions contained in this email are
endorsed by News International or its associated companies (NI Group), or wish to rely
on them, please request written confirmation from Corporate Affairs. In the absence of
such confirmation NI Group accepts no responsibility or liability.
NI Group reserves the right to monitor emails in accordance with the Telecommunications
(Lawful Business Practice) (Interception of Communications) Regulations 2000.
[NI Group does not accept liability for any virus introduced by this e-mail or any
attachment and you are advised to use up-to-date virus checking software.]
News International plc is the holding company for the News International group of
companies and is registered in England No 81701, with its address at 1 Virginia St,
London E98 1XY
References
1. http://www.thes.co.uk/
2. mailto:???@uea.ac.uk
3. http://www.thes.co.uk/
4. http://www.tyndall.uea.ac.uk/
“Decrypting” Mike Hulmes email to “Asher Minns”.
Asher Minns: Communications & Centre Manager A.Minns@uea.ac.uk
Tel: +44 (0)1603 59 3906
subject: Re: reinventing bbc economics coverage
Investing messages 1078.txt
Thu, 17 Jun 2004 11:48:31 am
1078.txt- Asher
1078.txt-
1078.txt: ——————————
1078.txt- Mr Asher Minns
1078.txt- Communication Manager
Opening 1078.txt results:
“Mike,
below are the details for Tuesday’s BBC briefing at White City in Shepherds Bush. Rebekah
Philips will meet you at the Stage Door (clearly signposted) at 1pm for a buffet lunch
before a 1:30 start. It finishes at 2:30.”
Harmles meeting at the Stage Door.
But opening —————————— with FOIA Grepper tells another story :
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=+——————————
date: Thu Oct 16 17:53:52 2003
from: Mike Hulme
subject: Re: reinventing bbc economics coverage
to: “Asher Minns”
Fine for me right now. Alex might also be interested.
Mike
At 17:47 16/10/2003 +010 ???, you wrote:
From: “Asher Minns”
To: ,
,
“Mike Hulme” ,
,
“Bo Kjellen” ,
Subject: reinventing bbc economics coverage
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 17:47:02 +010 ???
Organization: University of East Anglia
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
Dear Ian, Tim, Mike, Jonathan, Bo, Kerry,
Are you available on Monday 10th November to talk with Vicki Barker from the
BBC about how their news service could better represent global economics in
their reporting? (There is a little more information below)
I’ll nominate 1-2pm lunchtime as a suggestion, but the timing is totally
flexible if I find that lunchtime is no good for most.
Neil Adger is away for that date, but please do let me know if I ought to
include some other people.
Best wishes,
Asher
>From Vicki Barker:
If we were to reinvent economics coverage from scratch, TODAY, incorporating
what we now know (or think we know) about global environmental and economic
trends… what would it look like?
In recent years, I have watched an environmental undertow beginning to tug
at economies around the world, even as the world’s peoples have been
awakening to the realities of an increasingly-globalized economy; and I have
wondered if current newsgathering practices and priorities are conveying
these phenomena as effectively as they could be.
——————————
Mr Asher Minns
Communication Manager
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
[1]www.tyndall.ac.uk
Mob: ???
Tel: +44 ???
FOIA File structure seen as DOS file structure.
SUB Directory REDACTED.
CD/ redacted
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=REDACTED
DIR
—
Thu, 9 Oct 2008 6:56:17 am
0058.txt- Ralf
0058.txt-
0058.txt:[[[redacted: reference]]]
0058.txt-
0058.txt- Finally, might I ask that you note and then erase this email. I have found that recent
—
OPEN 0058.txt-
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=0058.txt&search=REDACTED
“
date: Thu Oct 9 17:56:17 2008
from: Keith Briffa
subject: Re: Tom Giverin – IN STRICT CONFIDENCE
to: “Toumi, Ralf”
Ralf
[[[redacted: reference]]]
Finally, might I ask that you note and then erase this email. I have found that recent
enquiries under the Freedom of Information Act, or Data Protection Act, can become
considerable time sinks , or the basis of some inconvenient subsequent distractions.
with best wishes
Keith
At 12:38 09/10/2008, you wrote:
Dear Keith,
Tom has applied to do a PhD with me (probably mesoscale modelling). Could you please
give me a reference for him. In particular I would be interested to know if you would
take him in your group (and why you think he is still available; which is good for
me…, but I always worry at this time of year).
Best wishes,
Ralf
Professor Ralf Toumi
Department of Physics
Imperial College
London SW7 2AZ
UK
Rm. H713 (Huxley Building)
Telephone: + 44 (0) ???
Fax: + 44 (0) ???
email: [1]???@imperial.ac.uk
Web: [2]http://www.sp.ph.ic.ac.uk/~rtoumi/
—
Professor Keith Briffa,
Climatic Research Unit
University of East Anglia
Norwich, NR4 7TJ, U.K.
Phone: +4 ???-1603-593909
Fax: +4 ???-1603-507784
[3]http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/people/briffa/
Open — it is also a filename, + = space key seen on FOIA Grepper.
DIR
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=+–
“### CANNOT PARSE DATE ###
0876437553.txt-Sounds like you guys have been busy doing good things for the cause.
0876437553.txt-
0876437553.txt:I would like to weigh in on two important questions —
0876437553.txt-“
0876437553.txt:I would like to weigh in on two important questions —
0876437553 = UNIX time stamp
Open 0876437553.txt
“From: Joseph Alcamo
To: ???@uea.ac.uk, ???@rivm.nl
Subject: Timing, Distribution of the Statement
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:52:33 0100
Reply-to: ???@usf.uni-kassel.de
Mike, Rob,
Sounds like you guys have been busy doing good things for the cause.
I would like to weigh in on two important questions —
Distribution for Endorsements —
I am very strongly in favor of as wide and rapid a distribution as
possible for endorsements. I think the only thing that counts is
numbers. The media is going to say “1000 scientists signed” or “1500
signed”. No one is going to check if it is 600 with PhDs versus 2000
without. They will mention the prominent ones, but that is a
different story.
Conclusion — Forget the screening, forget asking
them about their last publication (most will ignore you.) Get those
names!
Timing — I feel strongly that the week of 24 November is too late.
1. We wanted to announce the Statement in the period when there was
a sag in related news, but in the week before Kyoto we should expect
that we will have to crowd out many other articles about climate.
2. If the Statement comes out just a few days before Kyoto I am
afraid that the delegates who we want to influence will not have any
time to pay attention to it. We should give them a few weeks to hear
about it.
3. If Greenpeace is having an event the week before, we should have
it a week before them so that they and other NGOs can further spread
the word about the Statement. On the other hand, it wouldn’t be so
bad to release the Statement in the same week, but on a
diffeent day. The media might enjoy hearing the message from two
very different directions.
Conclusion — I suggest the week of 10 November, or the week of 17
November at the latest.
Mike — I have no organized email list that could begin to compete
with the list you can get from the Dutch. But I am still
willing to send you what I have, if you wish.
Best wishes,
Joe Alcamo
—————————————————-
Prof. Dr. Joseph Alcamo, Director
Center for Environmental Systems Research
University of Kassel
Kurt Wolters Strasse 3
D-34109 Kassel
Germany”
There is still filename —————————————————-
DIR
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=+—————————————————-
Thu, 11 Jul 1996 1:07:13 pm
0837094033.txt-> NR4 7TJ
0837094033.txt-> UK
0837094033.txt:> —————————————————————————-
0837094033.txt->
0837094033.txt->
—
Open
0837094033.txt:> —————————————————————————-
“From: Alan Robock
To: Phil Jones
Subject: Re: your mail
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 10:07:13 -0400 (EDT)
Dear Phil,
It looks like you have found Baitoushan. Vol. 2 lists Kuwae as VEI 6 in
1452 +/- 10 AD. How accurate are your dates? By the way, Chris Newhall
thinks 1600 is the Parker volcano on Mindanao in the Philippines. He
hasn’t published that so far, as I know.
Could you please define “utter prat” for me? Sometimes I think we speak
the same language, and sometimes I’m not so sure.
I’m doing fine. We have a new building with nice new offices. I’m going
to Australia next week with Sherri and Danny, and after the meeting, will
visit Cairns, Adelaide, and New Zealand. I’m looking forward to skiing
on a volcano, if it stops erupting.
Alan
Prof. Alan Robock Phone: (301)???
Department of Meteorology Fax: (301)???
University of Maryland Email: ???@atmos.umd.edu
College Park, MD 20742 http://www.meto.umd.edu/~alan
On Thu, 11 Jul 1996, Phil Jones wrote:
> Alan,
> Thanks for the quick response. We’ll expect something from Melissa
> in the next few weeks. I also hope our copy of the 2cnd edition arrives
> soon. In our maximum latewood density reconstruction from the polar Urals
> to AD 914, the most anomalous summer is AD 1032. A lot of other volcano
> years are there with summers of -3 to -4 sigma such as 1816,1601,1783 and
> 1453 (I think this later one is Kuwae that is being found in the Ice Cores
> in the Antarctic. However 1032 is 6 sigma and it may be the Baitoushan
> event which you say is 1010 +/- 50 years or the Billy Mitchell event.
>
> I hope all’s well with you.
>
> Cheers
> Phil
>
> PS Britain seems to have found it’s Pat Michaels/Fred Singer/Bob Balling/
> Dick Lindzen. Our population is only 25 % of yours so we only get 1 for
> every 4 you have. His name in case you should come across him is
> Piers Corbyn. He is nowhere near as good as a couple of yours and he’s
> an utter prat but he’s getting a lot of air time at the moment. For his
> day job he teaches physics and astronomy at a University and he predicts
> the weather from solar phenomena. He bets on his predictions months
> ahead for what will happen in Britain. He now believes he knows all
> there is to know about the global warming issue. He’s not all bad as
> he doesn’t have much confidence in nuclear-power safety. Always says
> that at the begining of his interviews to show he’s not all bad !
>
> Cheers Again
>
> Phil
> Dr Phil Jones
> Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 ???
> School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 ???
> Norwich Email ???@uea.ac.uk
> NR4 7TJ
> UK
> —————————————————————————-
>
>”
This is an example file path, and seems to be endless.
I think that the master file is still in CRU computer systems,
so we have to sort files like I did.
Ilkka.
Email search by name
I Forgot thä link.
https://sites.google.com/site/myteurastaja/
Michael Mann File II
http://www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=+________________________________________