We all remember the story that ran viral last June about death threats in emails to Australian National University staff. It even ran overseas – here is The Guardian masthead for 6 June last year.
Now it has taken near a year but Sydney blogger Simon Turnill has had a huge FOI win in discovering that the emails contained no such threats. Read his story.
Why are we sceptics not surprised at this eventual outcome – so basic facts got hopelessly exaggerated by IPCC supportive scientists at ANU – so!! – and what does it say about about the rigor of higher level management processes at ANU. What a shocker.
Diseases such as diabetes, kidney disease, multiple sclerosis, vascular prescription viagra uk disease, and heart disease. There are no preventive sildenafil viagra de pfizer steps for sexual disorders in women. Increase in the side effects is also noted levitra generic cheap when alcohol is taken soon after or before the Silagra pills.Sildenafil citrate is the key ingredient of the drug sildenafil is in the dispersed state. It is easily available and can be found on any authorized pharmacy of the world and is widely said to be a marketing genious for launching and creating brand names. getting viagra prescription Andrew Bolt has picked up on the story too – saying the smear was as bogus as their theory. Right on target.
I see nothing today in the Fairfax owned Canberra Times, home of ANU – not keen to rock any boats eh. Note to read the story at The Australian – Google – Climate scientists’ claims of email death threats go up in smoke – then read full version.
I doubt we’ll see anything from The Guardian, either.
The emails have been made public over at the moyhu site. I have adapted and enlarged a list there by Alex – thanks Alex.
Doc #1 (25/6/2011) is just an upset citizen who accuses scientists of being dishonest.
Doc #2 (24/5/2011) is certainly hate mail by a fairly uneducated writer.
Doc #3 (23/5/2011) is a strongly worded email by another upset citizen who wishes unemployment upon scientists.
Doc #4 (4/6/2010) is an upset citizen who uses some sarcasm on this poor scientist.
Doc #5 (2/6/2010) recounting how a gun owner big noted himself over dinner – if you felt threatened – there is the option to mention to Police.
Doc #6 (24/5/2011) is almost collegial and simply raves on a bit about the lack of the ‘hot spot’.
Doc #7 is a duplicate of Doc #2.
Doc #8 (24/5/2011) is more brief hate mail from another uneducated upset citizen.
Doc #9 (23/5/2011) asserts that the report is ‘a load of rubbish’.
Doc #10 (16/6/2011) relates a phone call that the scientist evidently didn’t find threatening.
Doc #11 (8/6/2011) mostly an article from The Australian I think.
Editors note: I am amazed such pathetic material has been the subject of so much warmist beating up. I wonder at the cost.
delicate hothouse petals
do they breed those in the ivory towers of academia
update at Catallaxy
also
Do you see the ABC is still pumping out the lies despite evidence now that there were no death threats in emails.
“FOI emails reveal threats to climate scientists”talk about misleading the public. The ABC should be ashamed.
I see there were no death threats in emails according to testimony at Senate Estimates.