Bishop Hill is reporting that some ugly emails have been published due to FOI requests. He writes:
In the wake of the death threats that weren’t at ANU, several people sent FOI requests to the University of East Anglia asking for copies of the death threats that they said Phil Jones had received. The relevant emails have now been released and can be seen here
Be warned, this is very, very ugly stuff, and there are several messages in there that seem to me to be criminal.
Colour me disgusted
I agree, they are vile and disgusting. Nobody should have to endure these. And, no credible climate skeptic would send them. These are the work of cowards.
From the perspective of these mild mannered scientists, I know these sorts of things come as a complete shock to them. I can see how Dr. Jones would have been driven to depression right after Climategate broke.
From my perspective, having been in television and radio newsrooms for 25 years, this is pretty run of the mill stuff. I’ve also gotten emails like this in my work on TV and radio, as well as during my publication of WUWT. I described my experience with this sort of stuff previously when I took the overly excitable David Appell to task for bringing my deceased mother into the argument in David Appell denies he has any class.
Note that all of the email sender addresses have been redacted. That probably wasn’t necessary, as it is highly unlikely any of these vile little cowards that wrote this stuff used a real email address. In my experience, people generally don’t write such things when they have their real name attached to such vile prose.
As I’ve always said about the Internet and electronic communications in general, anonymity breeds contempt.
This doesn’t change the ANU argument, which has been clearly and completely debunked. No death threats were sent there. I suppose that there will be another round of the story now that these have been published, because small minded people like Appell have a driven need to paint skeptics in the worst possible light, so I’m sure all sorts of associations will be made. He’s gone silent since he came out on the wronger than wrong side of the ANU argument, expect a fresh set of hateful prose from him now.
As for this thread. I’m not going to tolerate much in the way of off color commentary. Moderators – snip at will anything that doesn’t meet policy.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
As presented, there is no way of telling anything about these emails.
If anyone EVER submits an FOI request for emails, you really need ensure that you request emails with all headers intact.
That’s not just the From, Subject, Date headers, but all the rest not normally displayed in most email clients, which give routing information etc. These are somewhat harder to forge, and are very useful in determining if multiple emails originate from the same individual(s).
The emails listed here are useless. Just a bunch of nasty words and phrases which have some indications of coming from a very restricted set of originators.
My first impression is that there’s something off about them. Reminds me of forum trolls, just trying to get a reaction. They seem to be too contrived to be taken seriously. And I agree that they sound like they came from just a few people.
A couple of months ago a FB “friend” erupted into a vile, profane, obscene rant about something that I had posted. She sad many hateful things to various posters on that thread, things that were over the top, out of bounds, and beyond the pale. A relative of mine posted that while she normally would be inclined to support the harridan’s position, she felt that when a person resorts to such angry vituperation to someone else’s opinion, one’s argument is automatically disregarded by rational folk. Debate need not be rude, nor disrespectful to those who disagree.
I could not agree more.
Well do we need to remember that.
Perhaps, we should a FOI to the University of Virginia asking for death threat emails to Michael Mann. If they send any, ask for the other emails.
Tom Moriarity: Firing squad with bb-guns and an unlimited number of BBs? That’s about the only way I see that one working.
Some people really don’t think their threats through. We used to see that sort of thing occasionally aimed at government offices and laugh at it. We only got interested when someone said something like “I am going to shoot you”, (or “kill you”, or “blow you up” etc.) that got things forwarded to the federal protection service in a heartbeat. The most common ones were very improbable sexual suggestions – some of which were quite funny when taken literally.
these things are “cooked up” by a small number of probably college students.
they are not the real thing.
they fall into the catagory that “if you see the real thing then you know it immediatly for what it is”.
and these arn’t it.
C
I just can’t work up a drop of sympathy in light of the fact that Jones and his partners in crime are trying to physically hurt the poorest people on the planet by his frauds. Add to that the damage done by his assault on honest science.
No, he is the scum that several called him. What goes around comes around.
I confirmed that the emails are the product of an official FOI request to and a response from UEA.
So that leaves me only with a nagging question of doubt about the real source of the threatening emails. I think I am entitled to that doubt given lack of morality by CAGW activists in the past few months wrt Gleick’s perpetration of an email scam and fraud.
My questions about the real source of the emails can only be answered by a formal investigation of the full email metadata and authors identity. What is the chance of getting that? I will continue my skepticism until that info is made public.
John
Jenn Oates says: June 13, 2012 at 11:44 am “Debate need not be rude, nor disrespectful to those who disagree.”
This isn’t a debate. It is billions of dollars, the economy, your job that supports your way of life and your personal freedom. The eco-terrorists are already murdering people in Africa to force this garbage on them. People get angry when what they need to live is threatened, and these “scientists” want to destroy it. I don’t find the comments surprising at all, and I expect at some point some people will carry out their threats.
Please give up on this “gentle minded academic” nonsense. These people are complete misanthropes and they don’t give a hoot who they harm. They don’t feel your pain. I have a hard time understanding how you can fail to understand that after years of writing this blog and being attacked by them, Anthony. You need to wake up to reality, you really are too kind.
What one should immediately recognize is the email reference to Alex Jones, the conspiracy talk show host. I guarantee you that most if not all of these emailed originated from people who listened to his shows. It is no coincidence the comments are closed on all relevant Climategate stories on Info Wars and Prison Planet.
As concerns the emails, an email arrives with an extensive set of headers that are usually concealed from the user by the email client software. Most of it looks like gibberish anyway, and your average user can’t make much out of it. These can always be used to track back to a source or to evidence that the chain was spoofed. If they derived from a legitimate source, either the owner was the culprit or his account hijacked. Either way one gets a read on the computer sophistication of the sender and their relative criminal leanings. The owners of hijacked accounts should have been informed. So, what did the UEA computer security team do?
gnomish says:
June 13, 2012 at 9:17 am
…
the meek shall inherit the grave.
that’s justice. darwin says so.
Darwin says no such thing. Darwin says, in a reductio ad absurdum, that “survivors survive” – in short, whatever works. What this means is that under many conditions, cooperation among a group leads to enhanced survival within the group; it isn’t anywhere near as simple as “nature bloody in tooth and claw.”
So, one needs an FOI request to prompt one to send the emails that make one look like a victim?
Yeah, I wasen’t going to send these out( bad language!), but, since you requested them…
Sheesh…pathetic!
wasn’t…sorry.
All that looks like “business as usual” on open (non-moderated) posting fora.
I found the emails distressing to read, but not nearly as distressing as vile, hateful opinions appearing here in the comments thread. I think the WUWT readership has really lost contact with reality. The very suggestion that these emails would be concocted to garner sympathy is beneath contempt. I would very much like to see Anthony weigh in and condemn these speculations.
REPLY: I’d be happy to do so, if I had the data. Unfortunately the emails had the most critical data redacted, much like the end of Mann’s hockey stick, so there’s no way for us to prove the true origin. If anyone can get the full emails with headers, and allow me to look at them, I’d be happy to confirm or condemn such speculations. – Anthony
John Whitman says:
June 13, 2012 at 9:23 am
“… I will remain skeptical until I see:
1) the original FOI request made to UEA/CRU by the person who made the FOI request
2) the original UEA/CRU acknowledgement of receiving the FOI request that they are required to send to the FOI requester.
3) any response by the requestor to UEA/CRU receipt acknowledgement notice
4) the actual UEA/CRU transmittal letter/email sent to the requestor which contained the release of the requested emails/info. ”
Now this is a skeptic talking and with good grammar and spelling. Gleick underestimated the grit of real skeptics in his juvenile attempt to deceive. Mr. Whitman is from Missouri, or he deserves to be made an honorary citizen.
So, no resisting that FOI, then?: Notwithstanding the moronic undesirability of such a dense innocuous attack (it’s only words after all, not something genuinely damaging like carbon taxation) I’d say the content, construction & credibility of the emails is directly in line with Gore et al’s unscientific musings, albeit with added profanity. “Reaping the Whirlwind” comes to mind.
These e-mails are very interesting, they look at first sight as if they came from loutish thugs, but if you read them for a second and third time, they are well punctuated, grammatically correct, with no spelling mistakes (apart from “neads”, which no-one ever mis-spells!).
These e-mails are a contradiction, they are full of foul language and threats, but they are obviously the product of someone who is intelligent. Intelligence seldom goes hand in hand with thuggery, unless the person is a psychopath. I do not think that there are many psychopaths who have an interest in the planet or their tax returns!!!!
I think these e-mails originated from the recepients!
No it is not, this is perfectly valid speculation and entirely plausible.
As anyone who has many employees working for them knows: One will find worse, written to them, on the bathroom and elevator walls, of the work place. Any unpopular decision or action will require repainting of walls in these locales. I don’t see this as much different.
Many frustrated, fearful, angry people love to vent in inappropriate ways. Anonymity gives them this ability to indulge, while seething. Nothing more. GK
Exactly.
I join Anthony in condemning such emails. They serve no purpose at all no matter how angry you are at these brazen manipulators.
I’m still more concerned about seeing the original (unadjusted) climate data than I am about these emails.
Nigel Harris: When one first endeavors to deceive, one should not be surprised that others cease to take anything one says at face value. The fact that Jones et al decided to prevaricate through omission and manipulation of the process means that those of us who caught them in the act are naturally going to be suspicious of anything they put out including (but not limited to) the breakfast menu of the local East Anglian public house. So unlike the old Ronald Reagan line of “Trust, but verify”, with these characters it is “Verify, then take what’s left with a pound of salt”.
That said, people really shouldn’t wish others harm even if they are perpetrators of the biggest fraud (monetarily at least) in the history of history. It is much more polite, when passing a train wreck of this magnitude, to point and laugh.
Nigel Harris says:
June 13, 2012 at 12:55 pm
I found the emails distressing to read, but not nearly as distressing as vile, hateful opinions appearing here in the comments thread. I think the WUWT readership has really lost contact with reality. The very suggestion that these emails would be concocted to garner sympathy is beneath contempt. I would very much like to see Anthony weigh in and condemn these speculations.
– – – – – –
Nigel Harris,
An experienced hardened investigative journalist, a good defense attorney or tough nosed senior police detective would not take anything for granted if email threats were formally reported to them. They would question the source of the emails themselves as a routine matter and question the recipient just as closely. You cannot assume anything about the motives any of the people involved. You should read some criminal court transcripts.
In addition, an edited comment from another blog,
John
Nigel Harris says:
June 13, 2012 at 12:55 pm
=============
Could you please identify and be more specific with regards to “… distressing as vile, hateful opinions appearing here in the comments thread”?
Could you recommend sites that you visit that discuss the so-called death threats where we could read comments that would be more suitable to your liking?
“I would very much like to see Anthony weigh in and condemn these speculations.” Did I condemn your viewpoint which I don’t agree with? Why would you want the majority here to be censured or condemned?
Are you a bleeding heart liberal who espouses the politically correct view to the point that you are choking on it?
Am I simply feeding a troll?