Climategate 2.0 breaks – 2 years after the main event
November 23rd, 2011 by Warwick HughesAmazing – get your own download here – looks to be 5000 emails plus other files. Looking forward to hearing about any interesting mails you find.
I have been told of this gem from the Jo Nova site.
<601> “David Jones”
subject: RE: African stations used in HadCRU global data set
to: “Phil Jones”
Thanks Phil for the input and paper. I will get back to you with comments next week. Fortunately in Australia our sceptics are rather scientifically incompetent. It is also easier for us in that we have a policy of providing any complainer with every single station observation when they question our data (this usually snows them) and the Australian data is in pretty good order anyway
No doubt there will be huge discussion on these 5000 odd emails for months to come around the blogs – links on right.
Posted in Atmospheric science, BoM Australia, IPCC | 16 Comments »
November 23rd, 2011 at 7:55 am
Is this a claim that all data is available on request (including pre 1910)?
Or is he saying that the figures have all been adjusted to be ‘in the cause’ ?
November 23rd, 2011 at 8:45 am
Since 1991 I have always had to buy my data from them Graeme – must have spent over a $K – until in recent years this BoM site is free and useful.
Has any “complainer” ever been provided with “every single station observation”.
I am interested to hear.
November 23rd, 2011 at 12:43 pm
Warwick are you being ‘snowed’ by the BOM
November 24th, 2011 at 6:08 am
Re my own FOI applications to BoM – I suspect I am being “snowed” Val. But what can one do ?
I see this site with a search capacity.
November 24th, 2011 at 6:28 am
warwick here’s another searchable site
foia2011.org/
your name appears three times by the way
November 24th, 2011 at 11:25 am
For the last 10 years or so, there have been nearly weekly claims that global warming is “accelerating”. During all these years, the actual temperature was either flat or declining.
Also during the past 10 years, repeated claims have been made publically that the evidence for manmade global warming has been getting stronger and stronger. In reality, the evidence has been getting weaker and weaker and the Climategate 2.0 emails have numerous confessions by the AGW advocates themselves that the models and reality do not agree. Nontheless, I expect the AGW advocates will continue to make their spurious claims in public. Their political goals are more important to them than being honest.
November 24th, 2011 at 3:22 pm
Declining sea levels must be a worry too…pass the popcorn
November 24th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
A Kiwi mate has just drawn my attention to this marvellous bout of hard work in email 2747 as NIWA try to keep the dear old Brits on the strait & narrow re my 2007 claims;
“Hadley Centre inserts more warming into New Zealand climate history”
November 25th, 2011 at 3:11 am
The theme of Climategate 2.0 seems to “Hide the Truth” concerning the failures of the climate models.
November 27th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
Warwick I think you have seen Topher in other youtubes
here’s his latest
blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/topher_on_crackpots_and_free_speech/
November 28th, 2011 at 2:48 am
Warwick,
I have not yet been able to go through these emails in detail, but the parts that I have read are even more damning. In my opinion, the emails show that climate “science” offered poor scientists very lucrative careers in pumping out fodder for poiticians. The current batch showed that many scientists on the “team” were concerned privately, but lacked the fortitude to make those concerns public.
December 3rd, 2011 at 4:12 pm
For those who have trouble with zip files try this
www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=+%3E————————————————————
Clicking on the text files will give an email which maybe a reply to previous emails.
A number I have read relate to the fiddle of the IPCC report eg 2910.txt 10Jan2005
Have a look at 1737.txt and the nastiness and lack of science by the team and Michael Mann in particular.
There is enough in these emails to wipe the reputations of most of the “team” pseudo-scientists pushing the warmist cause. I hope that some of them are taken to court for fraud or libel. I noted on WUWT that Dr Pat Michaels ( wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/02/team-ugliness-an-call-to-get-a-skeptics-phd-thesis-revoked/) has an open letter about defamatory remarks in emails by Dr T Wigley. Many are urging him to sue which at least could lead to exploratory orders on other emails.
December 4th, 2011 at 7:25 am
I got a kick out of just finding out that Phil was bad mouthing me to the WMO at the time he sent me the now notorious email – see email 1299 here
December 4th, 2011 at 5:11 pm
Warwick, very interesting.
I thought I would do a search on your name www.ecowho.com/foia.php?search=Warwick+Hughes&word=y
The last one 1256765544.txt (www.ecowho.com/foia.php?file=1256765544.txt&search=Warwick+Hughes)is also interesting. One can see why the team dislikes Dr Michaels.
I have copied some of the emails for future reference.
A search on Tom Wigley should be interesting.
December 6th, 2011 at 7:46 am
The administrators at Penn State University who conducted the Michael Mann exoneration, which they attempted to disguise as an inquiry in his behavoir are the very same people who condusted an ongoing exoneration of Sandusky, the pedaphile football coach. The common demoninator in both the Sandusky and Mann exonerations is that they both brought in piles of cash to Penn State. As such, it was deemed better to excuse bad behavoir than to truly investigate the matters and thus risk losing these cash cows.
Now that there are new administrators at Penn State, it may be the right time to push for a true inquiry into Michael Mann’s behavoir. I imagine that the new batch of administrators is more concerned about setting the university bck on the right track rather then protecting miscreants who happened to bring money to the university. We can only hope.
December 15th, 2011 at 9:01 am
nice article on climategate1 & 2
www.nas.org/polArticles.cfm?doctype_code=Article&doc_id=2319