This is almost as clueless as the raid on Tallbloke by the police looking for scraps. But it does underscore one thing – investigators are clueless and so is the major press.
For the record, I don’t know who “FOIA” is either and given the stunning lack of success (and poor judgement demonstrated recently) in investigation two years on, I doubt they’ll ever discover who it was. – Anthony
Guest post by Jeff Id
Their Side – Bloggers “knew” FOIA emails were coming
I just had a phone conversation with Leslie Kaufman of the NYT on the ‘hacker’. She was careful to call the FOIA people by that PC name. Rule 1 – Don’t offend the witness unless you want them upset. I didn’t really want to do the interview because these things don’t usually go well for me and it took me several days to make time. Unfortunately my Achilles heel is that I tend to say what I think. — I know you are all surprised.
She asked several questions about the hacker and said that her job was to investigate that aspect and not the climategate emails – which she believed had been covered. Of course I took a little time to explain the science of the issue and even brought up the conversations between the Dept of Energy and Phil Jones. In general, she seemed to repeat the opinions of the climategate committees despite the blindingly obvious problems in meshing any of their conclusions with reality. She said it was well covered that the researchers hadn’t been ‘open enough’. If that is the limit of the curiosity of your audience, it didn’t seem worth getting into.
One thing I did make clear and have made clear before, I don’t want to know who the FOIA gourp/person is because I’m not going to be willing (or technically able) to protect them – so if FOIA.org reads this, don’t tell me. My life is fine the way it is and the last thing I need is a leftist Justice department with an overstock of rubber gloves visiting my home. Leslie was very interested in whether I knew who the ‘hacker’ is. I had to tell her several ways and times that I really don’t know. I even told her that I used to think it was a student, to which she later questioned why I don’t think it is a student any longer. (Implying that I knew something). Hopefully, you can understand the direction of the interview from this. She said it was her mandate to follow this portion of the story.
For the readers here, it isn’t that I don’t believe it was a student, it is that I don’t know either way. Some friends with more knowledge than I on computers have pointed out some fairly technically sophisticated behavior in the releases which make me reconsider. I brought up the RC hack to Leslie, pointing out that no adult with sensitive information would release it that way. It’s a prank-like behavior. Of course, there is a certain narcissism which comes with a hacker mentality that sometimes delays the adult thought process. When I was in college, a stunt like that would sound like fun. Now — NO effing way.
I once met a 25 year old guy who had been caught hacking, and later hired by a security company. Despite having been “caught”, he was so cock-sure that he was flat nauseating. Either too dumb to know he wasn’t as smart as he thought or too young to have the social skill to refrain from flaunting his smarts. It is a culture of some computer programmers (sorry guys), which the ‘adult’ of my story believed he had risen to the top of. — Look what I can do! I often wonder if the hacker culture recognizes the vastly superior work built into the technology of the things which they program on.
This is not to say that FOIA.org released the emails out of narcissism or proof of superiority. Readers here understand that. Instead, it was done of understanding with a slight hint of that hacker mentality. They/he/she hold a recognition that the math and science are being perverted, data was absolutely covered up where necessary and the known results were without a doubt exaggerated to promote the cause. In my conversation with Leslie, I took the time to explain that I was not a denier and that any scientifically minded person knows full well that the basic effect of CO2 warming is incontrovertibly true. She suggested to describe me as a Lukewarmer, to which my reply was that I don’t even like that name because I don’t know how much warming there will be but due to current political mechanisms, there is a systematic exaggeration of the science.
Anyway, the most interesting point of the conversation came out when she said in very rough paraphrase ‘Their side is that the email releases were known to you ahead of time.’
The ‘their side’ was fairly interesting as we know the “Climate Scientists™” are in good contact with the NYT as are the government agencies. It could have been nothing but often when you hear inflection of how something is said, you can get the meaning. I took it as though she had been talked too by someone of the opinion that the three blogs mentioned in the DOJ letter were intimately involved.
The fact that I have done nothing wrong does not relieve me one tiny bit regarding the police. This is especially true when a billion dollar industry is involved. Those who haven’t dealt with law won’t get that. What gives me comfort is that this blog and its global friends have a wide readership means that ANY direct police action will have a wide public audience – not that it will stop the crazy stuff anyway. That is the limit of my protection.
As I have written before, I think Leslie has it right. Some powerful idiot(perhaps a congressman), who doesn’t understand blogs, internets (love the plural) or techie things in general with more than one button, thinks that the bloggers were in direct communication with FOIA. This is the single reason that I can make sense of for the confiscation of Tallbloke’s computers. Any other potential communications can be taken in pristine form right from the blog logs at WordPress.
Anyway, the conversation came across as some verification of my theory on why Tallboke had his computers confiscated. As always, I reserve the right to revise and extend my remarks.
UPDATE: Hilary Ostrov has an interesting piece on Climategate events in timeline format. She muses that a story in the Guardian may have had something to do with all this. – Anthony
2 years forward and they still have no idea? We have seen how bad the CRU/UEA have been with their I.T. I would hazard a guess that if you now type “Let Me In” you would have access to all they have using the original engineers backdoor password!
Me? I am like Anthony and have no idea but FOIA, you are a bloody hero in my book and you, Anthony, Tallbloke etc including all contributors, all have a great Xmas for the excellent work you have done this year.
“Record your conversations with these people.”
You should NEVER talk to the press without recording the conversation. They can leave out portions, cut out little sound bites, and make it sound like you said something completely different from what you said.
I remain of the opinion that there are so many ways that the emails could have been obtained that speculation based on what little evidence we have is fruitless. That said, I’ve come up with a little pet theory of my own based on a remark in one of Phil Jones’ emails about needing help to draw a graph in Excel:
Phil; Hey you! Yes you… get over here for a second. What’s your name again?
Harry; Harry.
Phil, You’re one of them computer whiz kids right?
Harry; Uhm…I’m a grad student, but-
Phil; Good! That’s exactly what I need, a computer whiz kid.
Harry; But I’m not a-
Phil; Stop talking while I’m interrupting. Do you know how to do a graph in Excel?
Harry; Of course-
Phil; Good. I need you to graph this data for me.
Harry; Well itz pretty simple actually-
Phil; Oh for a computer whiz kid itz simple, that would be like me explaining how simple the climate is to someone like you.
Harry; Well the thing is, I’m a grad student in atmospheric physics.
Phil; See? If I tried to explain how simple the climate is to you, you’d be over your head in seconds. Now, do this graph for me.
Harry; Uh huh. Well then…. Excel is pretty uhm… simple. You have to extract the…uhm…the compressed differential data source from the regression analysis in the…. uhm… cryptographic security ensemble.
Phil; Wow! I’ve no idea what you just said. I guess that’s why you’re in… what was it again? Atmospheric computers? Is that like cloud computing or something? Anyway, get this graph done for me.
Harry; OK. But you may as well go for lunch, this will take a couple of hours. Oh, and I need all your passwords.
Phil; My passwords?
Harry; Well yes. How else would I access the cryptographic security ensemble?
Phil; Oh well that makes sense. OK, the password for my desktop is “naturetrick” and the datafiles are “hidethedecline”
Harry; I need your email password too…
Phil; Oh I’ve got a realy good one for email. Itz “readme”.
And we “know” that more is coming, now won’t we?
If I were inspector Closeau, and and my boss was the man with the pointed hair, I would NOT ask myself the following question;
Did they hire an exceptionally well educated chinese student lately at the UEA?
The greatest danger to democracy is:
We are filling up powerful positions with clueless people who do not even manage to think a logical thaught. All they can do is drink champagne and eat canapees.
And the reason for that is that the progressives has destroyed the school-system.
So much so, that we are now dependant on the chinese to think for us.
They’d have to “suspect” pre-knowledge, wouldn’t they? Collusion and intent to steal is their only (Red Herring) defense. So, accusations all ’round.
henryIII;
Yes, and after they did or didn’t look, what would be their first impulse and action? Full disclosure to the public, or quick hookup with the federales et al. to facilitate apprehension and prosecution of the nefarious Foia?
i don’t know whether to laugh or cry…
22 Dec: PlanetSave: Zachary Shahan: Was Climategate Cyber-Terrorism?
It was obvious to me the second I heard about “climategate” that it was a crime (on the part of the hacker). But it hadn’t crossed my mind that it could be “cyber-terrorism” — now, it seems painfully obvious that it very well could be. Don Shelby of the Minnesota Post delved into this idea this week. It’s really a great piece and I recommend checking the whole thing out. If you’re not yet ready to click over, though, here’s the intro (well, intro and a little more):…
http://planetsave.com/2011/12/22/was-climategate-cyber-terrorism/
20 Dec: Minnesota Post: Don Shelby: Probe into climate scientists’ stolen emails gets serious
Agents in Great Britain have executed search warrants and seized equipment from anti-science bloggers who helped spread the stolen emails. The U.S. Department of Justice has sent letters to internet service providers and websites in the United States also involved in spreading the stolen emails. They are all being asked to maintain all evidence of any emails received from a shadowy source known as “FOIA.” “FOIA” was the chief distributor of the stolen emails. Norwich has called in the big dogs…
In the original reporting, Mann was often quoted, misquoted and taken out of context. Though the investigations have found he did nothing wrong, climategate has nevertheless hurt him.
Mann told me that the people who can’t abide the idea of global warming being true “have no legitimate scientific leg to stand on. So, they have turned to criminal acts in an attempt to distract the public and policymakers.” Dr. Mann is convinced that the criminal act shows the work of “industry-funded front groups and the individuals who do their bidding.”…
Cyber-terrorism?
The question is whether this can be characterized as a simple cybercrime — or are there elements of cyber-terrorism involved?…
So I turned to one of the most respected cyber-terrorism experts in the country, Bruce Schneier. Schneier has been called to testify before Congress. He is the author of eight books on the subjects of cryptography, warfare, crime and terrorism committed by cyber-criminals.
Schneier told me: “What I’ve been thinking about is whether the hack was intended to intimidate, threaten or bully. Then the crime becomes an effort to stop people from doing legitimate research. So, it is not just a data theft, but has a goal of creating a chilling effect, a threat, an intimidation.”
Schneier understands the cyber world, but also the law of unintended consequences. “We are moving into a world in which everything we do is persistent,” said Schneier. By persistent, Schneier means it just doesn’t go away. “A phone conversation is actually archaic,” he said. “Today the conversation is by email or social media and those conversations are persistent.”…
Dr. Mann has long believed that intimidation was one goal of the cyber criminals. “They want to intimidate, stymie, harass scientists who are out in front on the risks of climate change, and they want to serve notice to other scientists of what will be in store for them if they speak out.”…
Not only are our communications on the internet persistent, but so is memory. Dr. John Abraham, thermal scientist at the University of St. Thomas, told me: “Those crimes were used to fabricate lies about world-class scientists — lies that are still being repeated today.”
Mark Twain said, “A lie can travel half-way around the world while the truth is still getting its shoes on.”
I’m hoping the shoes Scotland Yard and the FBI are lacing up are track shoes.
http://www.minnpost.com/donshelby/2011/12/20/33938/probe_into_climate_scientists_stolen_emails_gets_serious
could this be the Minnesota Post, who managed to get an interview with Mann and Abrahams?? it certainly is where Don Shelby is:
Minnesota Post: About us
MinnPost is a nonprofit, nonpartisan enterprise whose mission is to provide high-quality journalism for news-intense people who care about Minnesota…
Board of Directors…
Advisory Council…ETC
http://www.minnpost.com/about/
Wikipedia: Don Shelby
Donald Gilbert “Don” Shelby (born May 27, 1947 in Muncie, Indiana)[1] is a former American news anchor on WCCO-TV in Minneapolis, Minnesota. He is regarded as an experienced investigative journalist, as his work has earned two Peabody awards and an Emmy Award…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Shelby
the mention of “terrorism” suddenly reminded me of a letter to NYT/IHT in 2010 that i came across this week:
8 Aug 2010: NYT: Letter to International Herald Tribune from Allin C. Seward III, Paris
How to Fight Climate Change
Paul Krugman (“Who cooked the planet,” Views, July 27) argued that the U.S. Senate’s failure to pass climate change legislation was due to “greed and cowardice,” notwithstanding the scientific and economic arguments. I disagree.
Climate change legislation failed to pass because the American voters did not fully support it. And the U.S. public did not fully support climate change legislation because no one except experts understands the issues…
The only way to effectively address climate change is for our leaders to make it an issue of national security: Emphasize the link between consumption of fossil fuels, especially foreign oil, and the rise of international terrorism. Once that link is clearly established, people will be willing to make an effort: The home-front will contribute to fighting against terrorism, which threatens every one of us. People will understand that there is no way to put a value on the lives of any of the nearly 3,000 people who perished in the Sept. 11 attacks, and that any effort is worth making to prevent recurrence of such a tragedy.
The oil lobby has no response to this argument….
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/09/opinion/09iht-edlet.html
PoliticalGraveyard: Seward, Allin C. — of Paris, France. Democrat. Delegate to Democratic National Convention from Democrats Abroad, 1996, 2008. Still living as of 2008.
http://politicalgraveyard.com/bio/seward.html
If it is alleged by ‘their side’ that there was an e-mail dialogue between tallbloke and FOIA before/after the release should questions not be asked of the recipient of the first batch of climategate e-mails ?
The first reliable report of the offering up of the Climategate zip file was to BBC journalist Paul Hudson of the on 12th October 2009 who then chose to sit on the file for 5 weeks.
This led to skeptic sites being involved as the BBC, having been tested for ‘honesty’, had been found wanting.
Chris B says:
December 22, 2011 at 6:52 pm
bubbagyro says:
December 22, 2011 at 4:29 pm
How about Witchfinder General, Matthew Hopkins, in his modern form of “The Team”? UEA is even in the same county.
Christopher Hanley says:
December 22, 2011 at 9:39 pm
Why is so much UK police time and effort being spent trying to track down the source of the disclosure of what has been described as normal banter or gossip between scientists?
If I was a UK taxpayer, that is the question that I’d be asking.
AND
pat says:
December 22, 2011 at 9:25 pm
Quote HuffPo
“Among many reasons for continued police diligence, climate scientist Phil Jones said he contemplated suicide after the initial email theft in 2009. So it is important for investigators to get to the bottom of this crime in order to mete out at least some justice for this baseless attempt at character assassination of climate scientists.”………
“Markey explained the significance of this investigation in a statement:
‘This is clearly an attempt to sabotage the international climate talks for a second time, and there has not been enough attention paid to who is responsible for these illegal acts. If this happened surrounding nuclear arms talks, we would have the full force of the western world’s intelligence community pursuing the perpetrators. And yet, with the stability of our climate hanging in the balance with these international climate treaty negotiations, these hackers and their supporters are still on the loose. It is time to bring them to justice.’”…..
“Gavin A. Schmidt, a climate modeler at NASA, said he found such exchanges unremarkable. He noted that difficulties in modeling were widely acknowledged and disclosed in the literature. Indeed, such problems are often discussed at scientific meetings in front of hundreds of people.
Of the new release of e-mails, Dr. (Gavin) Schmidt said, “It smacks of desperation.””….
Does anyone else note the logical disconnect?
On one hand there is the fulmination on ‘criminals’ hacking into research computers and releasing information that will sabotage international climate talks yet ‘the team’ are also saying that the information is unremarkable and ‘often discussed at scientific meetings in front of hundreds of people.’.
It would appear that two lines of defence are being employed simultaneously. Will unremarkable publicly discussed information _really_ sabotage international climate talks and even lead to Phil Jones’ demise? These would appear to be mutually contradictory memes used for differing audiences. Are they both really swallowed concurrently without comment by the ‘credulous’ MSM, police and security services?
We appear to be watching a stylized game based on prepared positions. The concern on the encrypted files may be that events are now under FOIA11’s control and (s)he/they might not follow the script.
My money is on FOIA being the secret identity of Keith Briffa.
He’s the only one IMO who made any attempt to reconcile the evidence with the fantasies. And he spends a lot of time with computers – who knows what his hobbies are?
http://assassinationscience.com/climategate/1/FOIA/mail/0938018124.txt
How can the mere release of emails amount to an attempt at character assassination ?
Surely any consequent character assassination would be due to the email content and not the release?
If character assassination is an issue (which AGW proponents do seem to accept) then the writers of the emails voluntarily assassinated their own characters did they not?
Why would the email contents have any effect on international climate talks unless the content is indeed fundamental to the value and purpose of those talks?
Surely the release of the emails was a service to the representatives attending those talks because the new information revealed helps them in making better and more proportionate decisions ?
Clearly they had no idea of the various doubts and qualifications set out in the emails which cast doubt on the probability estimates from the IPCC.
And I see lots of resort to allegations of criminality on the part of climate realists when there was none just as in the recent Tallbloke matter.
Why “hacker”? Seems to me the person was a “leaker”. Inside job.
Well said Stephen.
Told ya so
http://planetsave.com/2011/12/22/was-climategate-cyber-terrorism/
Tallbloke shouid not have backed down, but here we go again it seesm skeptics are incredibly weak when it comes to dealing with these guys. you lose everytime it seesm, BEST, etc….now lets join the IPCC its laughable
Propaganda is used, not only to attack your enemies, but also to hold your own side together.
The lie that the emails were uninteresting / well covered in the press, is not told for us skeptics,
but to reassure the believers that they need not think for themselves.
“Their side” is probably the fairies at the bottom of the garden. For obvious reasons, newspaper journalists don’t like bloggers; and environmental reporters probably dislike, even more, bloggers who question ‘settled’ science.
The NYT is one of the five newspapers which initially broke the Wikileaks/Cablegate story. There’s probably a moral here about double standards.
Mr. Whipple Left It Out: Soft Is Rough on Forests by Leslie Kaufman
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/science/earth/26charmin.html?em
Solution:
http://www.ihatethemedia.com/new-york-times-says-use-crappy-toilet-paper
Had I been subject to that interview I would have kept repeatingth e same question back to this “investigative” journalist.
“Why do you keep referring to this unknown person or persons (!) as a hacker? When and by whom has it been established that the data acquired by an unauthorised external person(s)?”
It’s time for you British coppers to stop pestering Tallbloke. I confess: I’m FOIA. But you won’t find any evidence on my iMac. I’m far too clever to leave such obvious clues. Here’s how I did it.
First I waited for an auspicious sign. In this case, it was a black cat crossing my patio at sunset. Then I performed a Black Mass. Then I sacrificed a goat. And last but not least, I burned some incense for the Computer Gods, while high on Earl Grey tea and haggis.
Actually, I was kidding about the haggis. It’s contraband here in the U.S.
Christopher Hanley
You just hit the nail on the head.
davidmhoffer says:
December 22, 2011 at 10:39 pm …
davidmhoffer, I want to acknowledge that post of yours. Clever. Funny. Well written. Thanks for the morning smile!
The spin and speculation on this is endless. Two things though are pretty certain from the POV of those affected.
Using the “hacker” term allows them to also assign the following associations:
Criminality
Outsider
able to call the act a “Fishing expedition”
able to say “Nothing to see here”
The term “insider” on the other hand can be associated with:
internal knowledge of malfeasance
internal knowledge of where proof of the malfeasance resides
If you were the “victim”, and you knew that what you wrote on the emails was potentially damaging, which term would be the better one for you to publicize?
From my POV, inside access, especially with FTP Admin rights using a “casually” obtained ID and password that was divorced from your own ID, and access to an inside the LAN computer with a flash drive in hand would be the easiest way to get the information – if you knew where to look….
Best,
J.