Climategate

Links to everything about Climategate here. Relevant links posted in comments will be added.

WUWT Stories in chronological order, newest first:


When Results Go Bad …

U-CRU

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

Zorita calls for barring Phil Jones, Michael Mann, and Stefan Rahmstorf from further IPCC participation

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.

CRU Emails “may” be open to interpretation, but commented code by the programmer tells the real story

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

Mike’s Nature Trick

and the post that started it all…

Breaking News Story: CRU has apparently been hacked – hundreds of files released


Sponsored IT training links:

Join 642-357 online course and improve your 642-691 test score up to 100% using certified 70-685 material.


Other relevant stories:

3.8 13 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
419 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Brian
April 23, 2015 5:30 pm

Haven’t the CRU emails been extensively investigated by several independent sources and no one was found to have acted scientifically unsound?

otter17
July 4, 2015 10:41 am

Shhhh, they don’t want to hear that.

July 19, 2015 5:00 pm

Paragraph writing is also a excitement, if you be familiar with afterward you can write
otherwise it is complicated to write.

DB
July 22, 2015 6:58 pm

At Brian April 23, 2015 at 5:30 pm, the witnesses and questions to those witnesses were cherry picked. Nice try with the appeal to authority though. If they questioned scientists and investigators that were or became critical due to the evidence found in the CRU leak, the conclusions would have been damning for the CRU and the University of East Anglia as a whole.

ivankinsman
August 10, 2017 6:17 am

Now I am pretty sure there are some Alaskan climate sceptics on this site who are still saying, ‘nope, we are libetarians – anything connected to global heating is restricting our rights and increasing the financial burden on us so we do not support any kind of environmental legislation in any way associated with global warming.
Well, here are members of the Alaskan community who are suffering from the impact and who have basically been shafted by the new administration in Washington – but not that you care it seems:
Alaskan towns at risk from rising seas sound alarm as Trump pulls federal help – Communities in danger of falling into the sea say assistance from Washington has dried up: ‘It feels like a complete abdication of responsibility on climate change’
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/aug/10/alaska-coastal-towns-sea-level-rise-climate-change

don
Reply to  ivankinsman
October 5, 2017 7:58 am

fake news

ivankinsman
Reply to  don
October 5, 2017 10:17 am

Your just like the Donald – anything you don’t like immediately branded ‘fake news’ – pathetic my friend. Follow your own path in life and think for yourself …

n.n
Reply to  ivankinsman
August 15, 2020 12:44 pm

Sea level rise is observable. A correlation between sea level rise and climate, perhaps. A cause and effect relationship between sea level rise and climate change is a matter of truth, not fact, and climate change over a 30 year period is not established. Fake, misleading (misinformation), or deceptive (disinformation) news.

Fool on the hill
November 1, 2017 8:09 am

Oh my, THIS is still here? Haven’t any of you numpties heard? There were three investigations into the so-called climategate, and each found that nothing as alleged had happened, that researchers were falsifying nothing, and that the hacker [still being investigated by the police] thing except extreme frustration on the part of professionals trying to do their jobs and having to waste precious time answering FoI requests placed by denier shills to do precisely that. What a load of wasted efforts and time spent on nothing.
Still, everyone should have a hobby, eh?
Future miners of the web, if it and they even exist, will have a ;laugh reading all this fictional nonsense.

Editor
December 12, 2017 5:51 am

I have a copy of the “Harry README” file at http://wermenh.com/climate/HARRY_READ_ME.txt

May 1, 2018 2:59 am

It’s nice to read good comments. It makes it much more enjoyable!

Eddie Banner
October 18, 2019 12:38 pm

A critical review of Earth’s Energy Balance and the Greenhouse Gas Theory

Eddie Banner 18/10/19

As a physicist, I have long had doubts about the Greenhouse Gas Theory for global warming, and I recently came across a paper on this matter which enhanced my difficulties. This paper seems to base the theory on consideration of the global annual mean energy budget of Earth’s climate system, and shows a diagram by Trenberth and Fasullo.(1)

Several other published figures can be found on this topic on the internet, including some by NASA, with similar values.

There are a number of items here that I’m concerned about, but the main one is the claim for the downwelling back radiation of 333 Watts per square metre of Earth’s surface.

1. Where does all this extra energy come from, since the figure shows only (161+78), that is 239 Wm^-2 entering the Earth’s climate system from the Sun, and 239 being emitted to space, as required for energy balance?

2. The downwelling back radiation (333) is shown coming from the Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. However, it is well known and fundamental in GHG theory that photons of energy emitted by GH gases are radiated equally in all directions; therefore there is equal energy radiated upwards and downwards. This upwards energy flux is simply not shown in the Trenberth figure, but it cannot be ignored. It must be 333 Watts per square metre, and together with the unexplained 333 downwelling radiation, this makes 666 Watts per sq.metre to account for, because this is in addition to the 239 shown emitted to space in the diagram, as required. But the TOTAL input from the Sun is only 341.

Moreover, the upwards energy would add to the 239 already shown emitted, making a total of 572 emitted to space, which clearly is nonsense.

So what is the explanation? I should be grateful for any helpful comments.

(1) http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/staff/trenbert/trenberth.papers/BAMSmarTrenberth.pdf

December 19, 2019 6:07 pm

I just read an article linking the Sun’s “Ultra-Low Frequency Wave Structures” with abrupt climate shifts going all the way back to the Younger-Dryas period.

https://solar-cycle-schematic.com/2018/09/24/younger-dryas-mystery-solved/

March 16, 2020 11:23 pm

I’m glad I can write on your website. Thanks for sharing.
I also tagged mine.

Peter
July 14, 2020 5:53 pm

In 2006 I visited Glacier Bay in Alaska, and was handed maps with lines on them showing the melting of that 65 mile glacier which originally occupied the entire bay. They indicated that it started to melt prior to the year 1800, and the better part of it was gone by about 1900. All that was prior to the invention of the airplane, the mass-production of the automobile, and with earth’s population 1/4 or less than that of today.

Recently I checked the Glacier Bay website and did not see the lines on any of their charts showing that melting. Is this another case of erasing some inconvenient data? My understanding is that the data on the melting had been obtained from the early charts made by the seafarers documenting the coast for navigation purposes. I still have copies of what I was handed back in 2009.

October 16, 2020 12:56 pm

I like your chart showing three different precipitation results. I see that all the time in my research. So much overlapping data out there.

Regards,
Larry Berg

P.S. Your other Comment areas don’t work. They give an error message in the Website area.

December 1, 2020 2:09 pm

Hi, my name is Mike. Recently I found a very interesting site https://online-australia.net/ Here you can contemplate the city of Australia in all its glory, enjoy wonderful landscapes. I really liked it and therefore I decided to share it with you.

Samuel05
July 24, 2024 7:11 am

Monitoring weather and climate change around the world is becoming increasingly important. On our website, you can watch real-time weather conditions and climate changes through webcams. We also offer live streams from volcanoes, allowing you to stay informed about natural phenomena globally.

October 21, 2024 12:19 pm

If anyone disagrees with the scientific arguments for global warming, please submit your reappraisals to the appropriate scientific journals. I suggest: The Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, the International Journal of Climatology, the Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry, and Nature, among others. Your arguments will be carefully and expertly peer-reviewed. Work that involves misleading or erroneous arguments or that does not properly cite its references will be rejected. Do not expect to be taken seriously until you show, using accepted experimental and analytical techniques, that you have a credible explanation for the data on climate change. The world’s scientific community awaits your response.

1 15 16 17