The conspiracy theory that keeps on giving.
There’s a new piece of rubbish article on Medium making the rounds, with a “new” analysis of Climategate pointing to those wascally Wussians, by Iggy Ostanin
The identity of the hackers has remained a mystery despite the efforts of law enforcement and journalists. It can be revealed for the first time that evidence points to the Russian city of Ekaterinburg.
For those familiar with the original Climategate story, skip this next part.
WUWT Stories in chronological order, newest first:
Telegraph’s Booker on the “climategate” scandal
“Climategate” surpasses “Global Warming” on Google
Mann to be investigated by Penn State University review
Understanding Climategate: Who’s Who – a video
The Curry letter: a word about “deniers”…
How “The Trick” was pulled off
The Australian ETS vote: a political litmus test for cap and trade
An open letter from Dr. Judith Curry on climate science
Climategate protester pwn3d CBC on live TV
UEA Climate Scientist: “possible that…I.P.C.C. has run its course”
IPCC reviewer: “don’t cover up the divergence”
McIntyre: The deleted data from the “Hide the Decline” trick
Climategate: Stuart Varney “lives with Ed”
Climategate: Pielke Senior on the NCDC CCSP report – “strong arm tactics”
Warwick Hughes shows how Jones selections put bias in Australian Temperatures
Climategate: CATO’s Pat Michaels and Center for American Progress Dan Weiss on Fox News
Quote of the week #23 – calls for resignation in Climategate
Uh, oh – raw data in New Zealand tells a different story than the “official” one.
Climategate: “Men behaving badly” – a short summary for laymen
Statement on CRU hacking from the American Meteorological Society
Climategate: hide the decline – codified
Must see video – Climategate spoof from Minnesotans for Global Warming
The people -vs- the CRU: Freedom of information, my okole…
Government petition started in UK regarding CRU Climategate
CEI Files Notice of Intent to Sue NASA GISS
The appearance of hypocrisy at the NYT – Note to Andy
Nov 24 Statement from UEA on the CRU files
Nov 23 Statement from UEA on the CRU files
Monbiot issues an unprecedented apology – calls for Jones resignation
The CRUtape Letters™, an Alternative Explanation.
Video: Dr. Tim Ball on the CRU emails
Pielke Senior: Comment On The Post “Enemies Caught In Action!” On The Blackboard
Bishop Hill’s compendium of CRU email issues
Spencer on elitism in the IPCC climate machine
CRU Emails – search engine now online
Release of CRU files forges a new hockey stick reconstruction
and the post that started it all…
Breaking News Story: CRU has apparently been hacked – hundreds of files released
This arrogant writer hack putz journo seems to be a great example of someone who thinks he’s a lot smarter than he actually is. For example:
What the hackers failed to realize is that along with the sender, recipient and subject line, every emails they published contained the time and date they were sent, true to the in the UK time zone.
Yeah, the hackers, the anti-terrorist task force of the UK, hundreds of articles from both supporters and detractors of UEA, commentators, forensic analyses by numerous IT professionals, the Norfolk Constabulary, ALL FAILED TO REALIZE….
(He soooooo smmmmaaarrrrtttt). He continues:
Crucially, when Unix Time file names are decoded there is a mismatch — the system clock of the computer used to handle the hacked files was five hours ahead of the UK. This places the computer in a time zone that spans countries including Pakistan and Uzbekistan, and a strip of Russia that includes the city of Ekaterinburg.
Stephen McIntyre of Climateaudit.org has gone on Twitter to shred this offal masquerading as investigative journalism. You may want to read the Medium article before reading the defenestration below.
(FYI CG1 stands for the first release of Climategate emails.)
new article https://t.co/UMsRnuJUCh purports to show that Climategate emails were hacked from Russia, claiming that timestamp nomenclature of emails shows +05:00 timezone. They got it backwards. Nomenclature shows -05:00/-04:00 (East North American).
— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) July 2, 2019
2/ email names are generated from timestamp of email IGNORING timezone in email header. This results in many email chains being out of order in CG1. An example: timestamp 14:59:03 is read as though Eastern Standard Time (-05:00) – not Pacific then expressed in UTM timestamp. pic.twitter.com/lmKZL6nNcI
— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) July 2, 2019
3/ another example from summer. Timestamp 17:36:26 in Mountain Time -06:00 read as though Eastern Daylight -04:00, expressed in UTM. pic.twitter.com/5w450tayZH
— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) July 2, 2019
4/ because their single example had been written in GMT, they didn't understand what was going on. Its timestamp 14:17:44 was in GMT, but was read as Eastern Standard -05:00, then expressed in UTM (5 hours ahead).
Nothing to do with Ekaterinaburg +05:00. pic.twitter.com/JKU5N3iCBI
— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) July 2, 2019
5/ I don't think that this nomenclature proves that Climategate hack took place from eastern North America.
— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) July 2, 2019
6/ also keep in mind that metadata analysis by Forensicator and others gives much stronger argument for North American time zone for DNC hack computers. Stronger because evidence very subtle.
— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) July 2, 2019
7/ Iggy obviously never worked with CG emails. He said that nomenclature "easily allows the sorting of the emails in chronological order making the messages easier to follow." Not quite. Because nomenclature ignored time zone, threads often out of order. pic.twitter.com/BUwZsVbt0P
— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) July 2, 2019
8/ connection of nomenclature to UNIX timestamps has been known since very early days e,g, https://t.co/m0M6IZVdcW Though connection to timezone not mentioned in early comments pic.twitter.com/XIehWbJ0Yq
— Stephen McIntyre (@ClimateAudit) July 2, 2019
Ostanin is apparently trying to imply that the Climategate leaks were fabrications, while the participants in the leaked emails admit they were real. Getting the date stamps wrong, as McIntire points out, just makes the allegation even sillier.
Doesn’t matter what’s true – it only matters what you can make people believe.
exactly…throw it out there
..and not one person will know it wasn’t true
OK … now tell WHY? “the Russians” would want to PREVENT the West from voluntarily crippling its fossil fuel industry? Why would muh Russia interfere with the West’s dependence on Russian oil and gas?
Sometimes, all one needs is the ‘smell test’ to dismiss idiotic notions.
Beyond that, the Clinton’s have had a close relationship with the Russians going back years. Even permitting the Russians to buy key American technology and companies.
If the Russians wanted to help anyone, it would have been Hillary.
And Hillary was susecptible to blackmail from the Russians since they were involved in the corrupt Russian One sale and have all the details about who in the Clinton organization was bribed and how much and when and where it happened.
Yeah, the Russians definitely wanted Hillary as president. They could control her with threats of exposing her criminal activities. The Chinese are the same way, they wanted Hillary because they would have lots of blackmail opportunities when it comes to both Bill and Hillary Clinton. The Chinese, like the Russians, know where all the bodies are buried when it comes to dealing with the Clintons.
Instead, they got Trump! A guy they have no power over! A guy who won’t have to consider Chinese or Russian blackmail before he makes a decision.
Abbott, you don’t know what you are talking about. There was no “Russian One sale.”
…
I suggest you investigate matters, and learn what happened. The deal was for “Uranium One,” and if it was corrupt, can you point me to the arrests made in the investigation of the “corruption?”
Putin and the Russians know exactly how many rubles/dollars of dirty money they laundered through Trump with real estate deals.
“and if it was corrupt, can you point me to the arrests made in the investigation of the “corruption?””
Well, Keith, I’m hopeful that the resluts of the ongoing investigations by the DOJ into all of that will be made public soon.
What I find interesting about Hillary selling U.S. uranium to Russia is that Robert Mueller was FBI Director at the time, and signed off on the deal, although he knew all about the corruption and bribery going on because he had a spy planted high up in this little fraud who documented the whole thing and all the players, and for some strange reason the FBI started harrassing this guy, and now he has a dynamite lawyer who I think is going to get to the bottom of this scandal for all of us to see.
You are free to console yourself with the thought that Hillary hasn’t been indicted *yet*.
Again Abbott, you don’t know what you are talking about. Hillary did not sell U.S. uranium to Russia. No uranium was sold to Russia. There’s not much point in discussing this incident with you because you don’t even know the basic facts in the case. In order for anyone in the USA to sell uranium to Russia, they need an export license from the NRC. None was ever issued.
Actually, it was laundered through Canada and Europe. You seem to only know Clinton spin.
“Putin and the Russians know exactly how many rubles/dollars of dirty money they laundered through Trump with real estate deals.”
Talk about unsubstantiated claims. Haven’t you noticed: Trump is pure as the driven snow, despite the Democrats best efforts. The crazy Democrats (Obama) deliberately tried to set Trump up for a fall, and the rest of the Democrats have searched every nook and cranny for some kind of corruption or illegality of Trump’s and have found absolutely nothing. Trump may prove to be one of the most honest presidents the United States ever had.
Obama’s plan might have worked, except he ran into an honest man in Trump and the plan got upset. A lesser man might have fallen into Obama’s trap.
I’m just delighted Trump is president. Nothing could be better for this nation and this world. Let’s hope our upcoming leaders learn a little something from Trump. Success does breed success, so maybe our future will be hopeful even after Trump is no longer president.
We’ll have to create a new position for Trump after his second term is over: Chief Advisor to the President.
In the meantime, Trump continues to destroy Socialism and show Free Markets and Personal Freedom are the way to go, and it is driving the Democrats insane. I mean *really* insane. The Left has turned into an echo chamber of insanity and delusion.
Thank you Halla, for confirming the fact that no uranium was sold to Russia. And speaking of “laundering” it would be good of you to explain to Mr. Abbott how many Russians own apartments in the Trump Tower in Manhattan.
Halla, what evidence are you basing your accusation that Uraninum One yellowcake was sold to/shipped to Russia?
Try reading “Clinton Cash”
Keith, the answer to that question would be zero.
Those deals only exist in your fevered imagination.
Tom, Keith firmly believes whatever his handlers tell him to belive.
MarkW says zero.
..
Eric says something different: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZxjYrhlMAQ
Halla, you crack me up. “Clinton Cash” was written by Schweizer, employed by Bannon, at Breitbart, the CEO of Trump’s campaign.
..
..
..
Can you spell B – I – A – S ?
Keith, when the New York Times did a follow up on Clinton Cash, they confirmed the vast majority of the work on the one incident they covered. All you are going on is the Clinton campaign spin on the accounts, not the minor little fact that attempts to disprove any part of the reporting have failed.
Halla, you reference the book “Clinton Cash.”
..
Is that the book that HarperCollins had to make seven or eight corrections after it was released?
“on the one incident they covered.”
…
Which incident?
…
How many “incidents” were there in the entire book?
There were four or five major incidents of corrupt deals by the Clintons, and the NYT reported on the Uranium One example. The book had evidence sufficient for a Grand Jury case on each incident, if not quite sufficient for a criminal conviction in a trial. One can’t tell the veracity of a witness without some sort of trial.
Greenpeace principle 🙂
It is amazing how you can fool people to believe that 0,5 C temperature change would be a catastrophe. I would call it nice weather.
To me climate hockey stick was a bad presentation from the first time I saw it. Y-axis is too narrow. It should show the normal temperature scale from -50 to +50. It is what I have in my thermometer.
Combining two sources without overlay is a big no no – even when we talk about just changing the thermometer. Then lack of error bars not to talk about sparse and unreliable measurements. Errors are larger than the signal.
I do not point to conspiracy when pure incompetency is enough.
Incompetency is enough – but there’s a lot of deliberate conspiracy out there these days.
A 0.5C increase, +/- 5C.
Another hoax, from the exact same lot of sludge. Boy who cried wolf.
Most climate change purists are technologically and scientifically illiterate, so an argument in concrete terms won’t mean anything to them.
Well, except for those with engineering degrees who use all those BIG words that we don’t understand.
All those big words that you don’t understand, most of us understand them perfectly
That was actually my point.
I like the way he seems to think he’s the first person to discover that the file names were Unix times.
This point, and the 5 hour time difference, was discussed in comments on a WUWT post in December 2009
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/07/comprhensive-network-analysis-shows-climategate-likely-to-be-a-leak/
See in particular, comments from crosspatch. I found this out by the sophisticated hacking technique of googling ‘climategate timestamps’.
Oh, what a tangled web we weave,
when first we practice doing computer forensics without any training, experience or specialist advice…
…should have been a climate scientist
Mosher did that literally.
“I have found even grander themes to write about, such as our suicidal national energy policy, based on the “decarbonising” of our economy, which can only end in our lights going out and much else; and the even greater self-deception which lies behind it: the West’s obsession with catastrophic global warming, at a time when the rest of the world, led by China and India, is taking not the slightest notice, as it continues to build thousands more coal-fired power stations.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/03/31/farewell-telegraph-readers-60-wonderful-years/
D’oh!….. From super sleuth to super facepalm.
It doesn’t matter who leaked the emails; the damning content remains the same.
Kinda like the DNC e-mails.
“Seth Rich was unavailable for comment.”
Joel,
That is what I was thinking. Maybe this was an attempt to add credibility the nebulous, ill-defined, and imprecise claim “Russians hacked the election”. As far as I can tell this claim is based on only 2 extremely weak assertions. The first is the Russian based Internet Research Agency spent an insignificant amount of money on social media ads and other stuff. Maybe lapel buttons. No interview was ever made with an agent and no motive was ever reported although Dems seem to cling to worthless Mueller indictments.
The second assertion is the DNC server was hacked “by Russians”. This is based on Crowdstrike’s (a private computer security company) investigation of the servers. The FBI, Dept of Homeland Security and reportedly 17 federal security agencies are going exclusively on the word of Crowdstrike. NO LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY was allowed to examine the DNC server. Odd. Very odd. The cozy relationship between Crowdstrike ownership and the DNC principals adds another layer of suspicion.
Russian election hacking theory is as week as AGW theory. It needs all the help it can get. Personally, I like Trumps theory best: It was just some fat kid on a couch.
Wikileaks is adamant Hattie files were given to them by an insider.
Download speeds indicate a local device like a thumb drive. Too fast for internet speeds. Probably a disgruntled Crazy Bernie fan.
It is also worth noting that the timestamps shown here are those created by the email client. They are (usually, because they are easily forged) the time and Time Zone on the computer on which the email client is running.
I can take my laptop from Oregon (-8:00) with me to England and not bother to reset the time on it. Timestamps on email generated on that laptop will still show Pacific time, not UK time.
For this reason it is usual to look at all of the email headers, not just the one generated by the client because those will contain timestamps of intermediate systems through which the email passes, usually at least two of them. Fiddling the time and date on those systems is a lot harder, and discrepancies stand out like a sore thumb.
Any analysis based only on the email client created headers is very weak evidence.
One can easily change their timezone for a similar effect. No driving or flying required.
Not quite on topic — just to let you know Christopher Booker died this morning.
Sorry to hear that. A great loss to the reality-based folk in Britain.
Regardless of his views on the sad state of climate science, IMO, his support of intelligent design and dismissal of asbestos links to mesothelioma put him in the quackery column.
Belief in God is not quackery and if you followed his articles on asbestos with an open mind you would understand the difference between blue/brown asbestos, which no-one disputes is most certainly linked to mesothelioma, and white asbestos which is indistinguishable chemically from talc.
I can vouch personally for the existence of a long-running scam in the late 80s which made a good living for the “asbestos removal industry” with needless and expensive precautions whenever white asbestos was found in buildings. A series of articles only one of which saw the light of day before both my editor and I were threatened is the reason I still feel the need to post under a pseudonym!
Joel – Christopher Booker did accept the asbestos/mesothelioma link. His beef was that the control legislation treated the (comparatively harmless) white asbestos used widely for roofing materials exactly the same as the (utterly deadly) blue and brown asbestos, which are mineralogically quite different and have little in common except their names. This spawned a vast industry which took many innocent parties for a ride, and he took exception to that. His position has quite wide support.
I don’t agree with his ideas on Intelligent Design, but there are plenty of very smart and influential people who do. Non-scientists can be excused this stance, I think.
Yes, he did get some things wrong, or incomplete (I have some personal knowledge of one issue- he was never able to know the secrets behind the story) but considering that he was working largely alone (the excellent Richard North excepted) and failed to get the wider support of the investigative media that he deserved, I think he did pretty damn well. Such people are an ornament to society.
I’ll miss him, as will many
Vale, Brave Christopher, til we meet again. You sure were right about white asbestos too. Brett Keane, Soil Science Major.
Very sorry to hear that.
What about all the Russian money used to promote Western environmental and anti-fracking groups to protect Putin’s real ‘big oil’ billions?
Also, the rumours that the Salisbury nerve agent attack was because victim Sergei Skripal was investigating Russian support for Western anti-fracking groups and interference in elections to support climate change candidates such as Hilary Clinton?
Or perhaps the members of Russia’s GRU military intelligence agency really were just on a day trip from Russia to visit Salisbury Cathedral but ran out of time to actually visit it?
Seems likely. But what is your evidence?? Have you got some links to stories and articles on Russian backing for American environmental anti-fracking groups??
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/03/01/congress-russians-trolls-sought-to-inflame-u-s-debate-on-climate-change-fracking-and-dakota-pipeline/?utm_term=.4779ffff20cd
Good article, thanks!
Sorry for slow reply, I’m in the UK so most of my information comes from UK and European sources. Here are a few links, including one from the Financial Times quoting NATO concerns in 2014
https://www.ft.com/content/20201c36-f7db-11e3-baf5-00144feabdc0
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/russian-funded-environmental-group-gave-millions-to-anti-fracking-groups
https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/04/22/the-connection-between-russia-and-2-green-groups-fighting-fracking-in-us/
https://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2019/03/24/moscow-secretly-funded-us-anti-fracking-groups-is-it-now-attacking-us-energy-companies/
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/thanks-to-the-anti-fracking-lobby-britain-depends-on-russias-gas/
https://www.newsweek.com/intelligence-putin-funding-anti-fracking-campaign-547873
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/01/world/russian-money-suspected-behind-fracking-protests.html
The FT article from 2014 may be paywalled, here’s the report from the Telegraph:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/energy/fracking/10911942/Russia-in-secret-plot-against-fracking-Nato-chief-says.html
I note that Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth are quoted suggesting; “Perhaps the Russians are worried about our huge wind and solar potential, and have infiltrated the UK Government.”
Look at the squirrel!!!!!
Amount Russians “interfere” in US elections: 1 unit (ongoing for 70 yrs)
Amount indigenous US marxists/regressives “interfere” in US elections: 1 billion units
Yes, very accurate accounting.
“Amount Russians “interfere” in US elections”
The Russians don’t have to put much effort into interfering in U.S. elections because they can count on the Useful Idiot Democrats to do that for them.
Russkies nicked the true non-doctored global temperature data and surprise surprise produced the only climate change model that works !
https://youtu.be/fA5sGtj7QKQ
In Climate “science” even the timestamps are “adjusted.”
OK. It was the Russians. So What? No one has ever denied the authenticity of the e-mail texts.
Actually, I doubt that it was the Russians as they have been funding and supporting warmunism of years
Whenever we see some old movies on the TV, it invariably means that a new version is just about to be released.
Does the dredging up of this old story herald another release of Climategate?
For decades Democrats and the left downplayed and mocked the threat of Soviet Russia as red baiting and ridiculous conspiracy theory. Then, they lost one election…
Suddenly, they now think “the rooskies are trying to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids”.
Do think straight. Russians do stuff like fund communists and greens, they do try to break the EU, they did buy the uranium. Don’t downplay them. They’re poor but spend on the DNC.
Whoever it was I thank them every day; them and Donald Trump. 💚💚💚
Those Russians were so slick, they even convinced Hillary’s campaign she didn’t need to go campaign in Wisconsin or Michigan.
Having followed that WUWT article ten years ago as a lurker, this comment made by ‘VG’ on December 7, 2009 jumps out at me a decade later:
VG said: “The cat is out of the bag, whatever they try, AGW is dead.. so skeptics don’t fret about current news stories etc. The cru story is self replicating and won’t go away. Even MSM is slowly becoming embedded in it. In the end people will notice that the weather/climate ain’t changing…. In one year, this won’t be an issue it will have changed to environmental stuff but not global warming which is OK.”
In the ten years that have passed since 2009, Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) a.k.a. ‘climate change’ has not gone away as a topic the mainstream press and the environmental activists like to spend a lot of time talking about.
Until the thirty-year running average trend of global mean temperature turns decidedly down — and then stays in a downward trend for another thirty years or more — the mainstream climate science community, the press, and the environmental activists will continue harping on AGW as being an existential threat to the survival of the human species.
When will that permanent downward trend begin?
If we accept Javier’s cyclic temperature analysis as described in his January 2018 article on Judith Curry’s blog as being the correct GMT prediction model, the permanent inflection point happens roughly in the year 2200.
That inflection point will never see the light of day. … the guardians of temperature will fudge the reported numbers up to give the appearance of a “pause” until they can incorporate an El Niño or something to show a continued March upwards.
It just is what it is …. and all the sheep will say ….
“Four legs good, two legs better”
Did you really mean 181 years from now, or was that supposed to be 2020?
2200.
=====
Rich Davis: “Did you really mean 181 years from now, or was that supposed to be 2020?”
I did mean 181 years from now, roughly in the year 2200.
One of the graphs that was included in Javier’s January 2018 Climate Etc. article illustrates where the permanent downturn inflection point occurs, and Javier himself confirmed in response to one of my questions that the year 2200 is roughly when it happens.
Certainly, within the next two-hundred years there will be some number of flat plateaus and some number of periods where the five-year running average and possibly even the ten-year running average turns downward.
But according to Javier’s graph, the thirty-year running average will not reach a permanent downward inflection point until about 2200.
As long as the thirty-year running average remains even slightly up, the mainstream climate science community and the environmental activists will still be pushing AGW as the world’s most important long-term environmental issue.
Me: “Alexa, Are there Russians in my room right now?”
Alexa: (laughing) “Nyet”
Ha ! I’m SO stealing that ! 😉
I asked Google the question, and it offered me some maps of St. Petersburg and other Russian cities.
Google is so drab. Has anyone tried Siri yet?
Why raise Climategate now?
It seems that the idea that consensus science has corrupted peer review is not redundant.
This Reds-Under-The-Bed allegation is only pulled out again because Climategate is still the real issue.
Pseudoscience with media backing.
The tags are:
Climate Change
Russia
Hacking
Climategate
Donald Trump
The final tag should spell it out for you.
Is there nothing those Russians can’t do?
They will be claiming that Russian interference in German mid 20th century foreign policy lead directly to the destruction of Friedrich Paulus’s military career.
Those Russians get everywhere. They will be telling people they sank the Japanese battleship Hatsuse next.
Iggy’s latest: “Personal attacks from Stephen McIntyre and his fellow pro-Russian conspiracy theorist Charles Wood. Not sure if either of them ever came across a Kremlin narrative they didn’t endorse.”
Does this guy have any brain cells?
Hackers use proxies and other things to disguise themselves when hacking.
Btw, I thought this hacking was supposed to be an inside job.
I posted the first comment on the first WUWT Climategate article, an allusion to Shroedinger’s cat:
I followed that 36 minutes later with a cautionary reading of the seemingly damning “Mike’s Nature trick … to hide the decline”:
Many comments were skeptical about the authenticity of the emails, in whole or in part.
In the first 150 comments I see only one commenter who is still active here, Pamela (although her visits are rare). Among the missing is my favorite, Bill Illis. I never dreamed then I’d become an old-timer.
Russians, maybe. I see dead Soviets.
CG was an inside job. The East Anglea police let the investigation go cold and closed the case. It wouldn’t look good to find it was an insider who was disgusted with the dirty tricks. The “hacking” was really to improve the optics of the event.
The left has this weird sense of propriety that illegal release of personally felonious information somehow blots out their crime. The same with the DNC info “hack” (release) of the egregious inside manipulation by Hìllary supporters to block Bernie Sanders from winning the nomination. The dirty trick crime was somehow washed clean by the fact it was “hacked.
My first reaction to the Iggy Ostanin article was “You are going the wrong way. Head West from London Greenwich, not East into Russia. You have the sign of the longitude the wrong way.
Then, I read what Steve McIntyre wrore. It was so comforting to read it the masterful way that Steve has, for demolition of false arguments.
Memories came back of that intense activity on Climate Audit blog, about Watergate and its analysis and references to Mann and the Hockeystick. I am convinced that this work of Steve’s will one day be used as an example of how this newly-emerging means of communication, the blog, had the power to change the course of history. Geoff S
FWIW, the selection of emails to release for Climategate One, compared to Climategate 2, showed quite strongly that a person, or the person, who was a mastermind had a detailed knowledge of climate science. It points strongly to a UEA inside job.
But who cares who did the public release job? Apart from a desire to shake a hand and recommend a Knight (or Dame) hood, the important message is that the grubby conduct of this key group was shown to the world. The linen was far dirtier than the formal investigations were inclined to show. In emails to authorities at the time, I had the strong feeling that there could be evidence to support criminal charges, some related to Freedom of Information abuse, but the British sense of fair play and not knocking the Establishment prevailed, though reluctantly for some of the law enforcement officials involved. Geoff S
Climategate emails were leaked. This whole laughable episode is.. well laughable
The tranche of leaked emails were assembled by the CRU after all and then when they were not released, someone decided they should be.
I’d love to know who that was 🙂
Can you not put webarchive links to Medium on here? Why reward that utterly garbage rag with ad money?