Fourth scandal to emerge from criminal CRU email hack
Ouroboros Rex
researchers with a raft of frivolous FOIA requests. Mckintyre reacts to the
inevitable negative response, and a DOE official tries to get climate
researcher Ben Santer fired on political grounds.
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=940&filename=1228330629.txt
"From: Phil Jones <p.j...@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
To: san...@xxxxxxxxx.xxx, Tom Wigley <wig...@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Subject: Re: Schles suggestion
Date: Wed Dec 3 13:57:09 2008
Cc: mann <ma...@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Gavin Schmidt <gsch...@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, Karl
Taylor <tayl...@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>, peter gleckler <glec...@xxxxxxxxx.xxx>
Ben,
When the FOI requests began here, the FOI person said we had to abide
by the requests. It took a couple of half hour sessions - one at a screen,
to convince
them otherwise
showing them what CA was all about. Once they became aware of the types of
people we were
dealing with, everyone at UEA (in the registry and in the Environmental
Sciences school
- the head of school and a few others) became very supportive. I've got to
know the FOI
person quite well and the Chief Librarian - who deals with appeals. The VC
is also
aware of what is going on - at least for one of the requests, but probably
doesn't know
the number we're dealing with. We are in double figures.
One issue is that these requests aren't that widely known within the School.
So
I don't know who else at UEA may be getting them. CRU is moving up the
ladder of
requests at UEA though - we're way behind computing though. We're away of
requests going to others in the UK - MOHC, Reading, DEFRA and Imperial
College.
So spelling out all the detail to the LLNL management should be the first
thing
you do. I hope that Dave is being supportive at PCMDI.
The inadvertent email I sent last month has led to a Data Protection Act
request sent by
a certain Canadian, saying that the email maligned his scientific
credibility with his
peers!
If he pays 10 pounds (which he hasn't yet) I am supposed to go through my
emails
and he can get anything I've written about him. About 2 months ago I deleted
loads of
emails, so have very little - if anything at all. This legislation is
different from the
FOI -
it is supposed to be used to find put why you might have a poor credit
rating !"
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=939&filename=1228258714.txt
> Dear folks,
>
> There has been some additional fallout from the publication of our paper
> in the International Journal of Climatology. After reading Steven
> McIntyre's discussion of our paper on climateaudit.com (and reading
> about my failure to provide McIntyre with the data he requested), an
> official at DOE headquarters has written to Cherry Murray at LLNL,
> claiming that my behavior is bringing LLNL's good name into disrepute.
> Cherry is the Principal Associate Director for Science and Technology at
> LLNL, and reports to LLNL's Director (George Miller).
>
> I'm getting sick of this kind of stuff, and am tired of simply taking it
> on the chin.
>
> Accordingly, I have been trying to evaluate my options. I believe that
> one option is to write a letter to Nature, briefly outlining some of the
> events that have transpired subsequent to the publication of our IJoC
> paper. Nature would be a logical choice for such a letter, since they
> published a brief account of our findings in their "Research Highlights"
> section. The letter would provide some public record of my position
> regarding McIntyre's data request, and would note that:
>
> "all of the raw (gridded) model and observational data used in the 2008
> Santer et al. International Journal of Climatology (IJoC) paper are
> freely available to Mr. McIntyre. If Mr. McIntyre wishes to audit us,
> and determine whether the conclusions reached in our paper are sound, he
> has all the information necessary to conduct such an audit. Providing
> Mr. McIntyre with the quantities that I derived from the raw model data
> (spatially-averaged time series of surface temperatures and synthetic
> Microwave Sounding Unit [MSU] temperatures) would defeat the very
> purpose of an audit." (email from Ben Santer to Tom Karl, Nov. 11, 2008).
Frivious FOIA exchange and Mckintyre's vengeful reactions documented on
Mckintyre's lie blog:
Crow
> Steve Mckintyre, of lying denialist blog ClimateAudit, inundates
> researchers with a raft of frivolous FOIA requests. Mckintyre reacts to the
> inevitable negative response, and a DOE official tries to get climate
> researcher Ben Santer fired on political grounds.
>
IOW, you got nothing...
Still scraping bottom, eh?
--
Crow.
Ouroboros Rex
> Ouroboros Rex wrote:
>> Steve Mckintyre, of lying denialist blog ClimateAudit, inundates
>> researchers with a raft of frivolous FOIA requests. Mckintyre
>> reacts to the inevitable negative response, and a DOE official tries
>> to get climate researcher Ben Santer fired on political grounds.
>>
>
> IOW, you got nothing...
Day 5 - still zero fraud found - except from you denialists! lol