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.
Hmmm. They all appear to be written by the same person – same refrain, same tempo, same disjointed cadance.
Now who would that person be? Wouldn’t be called ‘Jones’, would he?
.
Lucy Skywalker says:
June 14, 2012 at 9:21 am
There’s apparently good evidence that both Pearl Harbor and the sinking of the Lusitania were deliberately engineered, to get the US into the second World War.
==========================================================
Small correction, the Lusitania was about WW1.
Gunga Din, yes, thanks for correction.
Who but those on hallucinogenic drugs would take scientific advice from someone who thinks they are a bunny rabbit?
poptech-
sandusky would.
Poptech says:
“Who but those on hallucinogenic drugs would take scientific advice from someone who thinks they are a bunny rabbit?”
And who writes [and presumably speaks] in the 3rd person?
Smokey says:
June 14, 2012 at 7:48 pm
Poptech says:
I agree. The guy we are talking about seriously gives me the creeps.
Bob Tisdale says:
June 13, 2012 at 6:49 am:
“Oddly, UEA produced documents as a result of this FOI request.”
Bazinga!
.
And count me in with those suspicious of the provenance. Most skeptics have plenty of good arguments and don’t need to resort to scatological insults. These emails seem specifically designed to generate sympathy. Poor Phil.
I think Halpern did his chemistry “experiments” with the wrong chemicals one too many times. How someone who delusionally believes they are a bunny rabbit maintains employment at a university is beyond imagination.
Eli Rabett
I noted while visiting your own blog’s thread (my first and probably last visit to that juvenile site) that the commenter you quoted above so approvingly ended with an important line which you omitted. After the obligatory swipe at Delingpole your commenter ended with,
“There are plenty of historical precedents of this kind of hateful targetting of outgroups. None of them are pretty…”
You seem to be an intelligent guy, so I am puzzled by your inability to understand why it is the diverse band of “skeptics” on climate issues who are the endangered, menaced “outgroup” here in our time, in every relevant way. We are bullied, harassed, menaced, defiled all over the place. The “messages” which pour out continually in the media and policy worlds from abusive activists, academics, policy officials, and many activist-scientists like Mann & co. are extreme in their attempts to deprive us of any legitimacy or place in democratic politics. I am learning that you are an energetic perpetrator of the loathsome “denialist” meme against dissenters from your juvenile form of orthodoxy.
On the one hand, we have a bunch of nutty abusive emails, nearly all (likely) sent from thousands of miles away, few with any hint of a credible threat. Reasonable, decent people condemn these types of messages but ALSO condemn your dishonest attempts to smear all “CAGW skeptics” with bad words from a few anonymous fools. Of course the public has been offered no evidence that some or all of these emails are not propaganda acts by CAGWarmists, but after reading some of your blog threads with the many inane comments there, that is a possibility that must be considered. What we do not have is any evidence that any of those emails were written by anyone with an engagement in climate issues from the “skeptical” sides of matters (there is hardly a reference to the science and policy debates in any of the emails).
There is a great asymmetry of faux concern from you and your disciples.
For on the other hand, we have the real and continual, massive verbal abuses (and worse) of “skeptics” of whatever ilk in the climate debates. You and your associates habitually invoke the (holocaust) “denier” meme to smear everyone in your way. You strive to discredit and demoniize us, to deprive us of any legitimate say in these weighty public policy matters. Huge numbers of people are bullied, abused, and menaced into silence or web anonymity with threats to our jobs, our well-being, our livelihoods.
WE (varied as we are, the dissenters from climate orthodoxy) are the threatened “outgroup” here. Do you ever raise your voice against the countless abuses of “skeptics”?? From what I have seen you are instead a prominent malevolent conductor of such abuses on the web.
[cross-posted from Bishop Hill if mods permit]
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….”
========================================================================
Well Nigel, lots of us have condemned these emails, but the “reality” is that they only help the “warmist” side of the climate battles…. not only from the “sympathy” aspect for the embattled CRU scientists embroiled in scandal, but from the use many CAGWarmists make of such emails to paint all “skeptics” with that nutter brush. This does not say anything about whether any were “fake rants” (I think they mainly read as some lone angry people with little connection to climate issues). My guess is that they mainly come from a few angry people who just heard a radio show or read an article about the very real depraved scandals that go by the term “Climategate”. If real data is ever released or investigated about sources of those abusive emails (few of which are “threats” as opposed to offensive abuse) then perhaps we will know something more.
Still, I can’t help but recall a statement similar to yours, only a few months ago, when “Fakegate” had burst onto the scene, the energetic CAGWarmist blogger Michael Tobis ridiculed the idea that the AGU’s Chairman of the Ethics Committee could possibly have committed such provocations on behalf of the CAGW cause:
========================================================================
“…The suggestion that someone as socially adept and successful as Peter Gleick is involved in this proposed clumsy heist and forgery is ludicrous and not worth considering either way.”
Michael Tobis says:
February 17, 2012 at 10:18 pm
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/17/the-desmoggers-are-crashing-and-burning/#comments
========================================================================
Of course there was growing textual and circumstantial evidence (h/t Mosher and other sleuths) pointing straight at Gleick, but forgive us if some want to analyze what textual evidence there is to determine whether the “death threat” emails really are exactly what is claimed for them.
But Jones and his fellow incompetents are almost certainly not running their IT system. It is almost certainly being run by UEA, possibly but not likely by the CRU; but either way by professional IT folk who know their business and are upholding university (and possibly national) standards.
The first thing that occurred to me on reading the filthy emails: How did they get past the the university’s filth filters? When other commenters pointed out the syntactical irregularities, that cinched it: those hate mails are as phony as dendrothermography.
To non-skeptics it might seem absurd that “respected university folk” could attempt something so clumsy and amateurish, but then it wasn’t so long ago that people were saying the same thing about a certain high profile director of a west coast NGO.
FOI anyone? How about the e-copies this time, with all the meta-data?
PaddikJ says:
June 15, 2012 at 12:48 am
“To non-skeptics it might seem absurd that “respected university folk” could attempt something so clumsy and amateurish, but then it wasn’t so long ago that people were saying the same thing about a certain high profile director of a west coast NGO.”
I’m a skeptic and I can see that the UEA are stupid and morally challenged enough to do it. But I don’t think they did.
They didn’t fake enough emails (24 not 200).
They didn’t fake pertinent emails (none that can be linked to a prominent skeptic blogger or scientist’s influence).
They didn’t fake believably threatening emails (they all sound like sulky schoolboys not serious terrorists).
So their IT department look like fools? Yes, what’s new?
So they didn’t release private email addresses like Peter Gleick did? Perhaps their legal team forbid it; the UK has strict laws on data privacy (the Data Protection Act).
I’m just skeptical about this conspiracy theory. It would be strange if they had no loonies on the email. Just look at the internet. There’s no shortage of loonies.
Lucy, I generally like your posts, but this is pretty lame stuff. “pales vilely”?? Urk.
And, FYI, cars do not have “wing nuts”. Those are lightweight fasteners with flanges (wings), meant to be turned by hand. Perhaps you meant hub nuts, that hold wheels on.
If the emails are real they represent the feelings of people who have had their livelihood impacted by GW alarmism.
However, these are clearly US English emails, now, so far as I know, the US has not implemented any kind of carbon based law, such as Europe has done, and hasnt seen jobs and industry moved offshore, such as Europe has experienced.
Also the language used is that of a sociopathic adolescent, I cannot imagine for one second that any European would write like this seriously. They are a joke, and therefore I think they are fake.
If you can’t take the heat, stay out of the kitchen! While I agree the e-mails cross the line, they are nothing compared to the lies fostered on us by Phil and his colleagues. So Phil won’t be getting any of my sympathy, until he comes forward and honestly acknowledges the AGW fraud. And as other commenters have noted, these very well may be faked or a false-flag psyops perpetrated by AGW enthusiasts.
I disagree Matt. As an American, I find some of the curse word spellings and usage unusual. I would say it’s most likely British English.
My other post looks like it disappeared. I think Phil would garner more sympathy if he would be forthright and apologize for the AGW hoax. As it is, he and his colleagues are responsible for defrauding the world of billions of dollars! So as much as I’d like to sympathize, I’m unable to do so. And I am suspicious that these e-mails are actually a false flag psyops perpetrated by AGW enthusiasts and their operatives.