#Thieves steal paleoclimatology email, claim it disproves global warming
5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09
hackers-leaked-emails
Climate sceptics claim leaked emails are evidence of collusion among
scientists
Hundreds of emails and documents exchanged between world's leading
climate scientists stolen by hackers and leaked online
A researcher collects data from an electronic device to monitor climate
change.
A researcher collects data from an electronic device to monitor climate
change. Photograph: Vo Trung Dung/Corbis
Hundreds of private emails and documents allegedly exchanged between some
of the world's leading climate scientists during the past 13 years have
been stolen by hackers and leaked online, it emerged today.
The computer files were apparently accessed earlier this week from
servers at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, a world-
renowned centre focused on the study of natural and anthropogenic climate
change.
Climate change sceptics who have studied the emails allege they provide
"smoking gun" evidence that some of the climatologists colluded in
manipulating data to support the widely held view that climate change is
real, and is being largely caused by the actions of mankind.
The veracity of the emails has not been confirmed and the scientists
involved have declined to comment on the story, which broke on a blog
called The Air Vent.
The files, which in total amount to 160MbB of data, were first uploaded
on to a Russian server, before being widely mirrored across the internet.
The emails were accompanied by the anonymous statement: "We feel that
climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept
under wraps. We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code
and documents. Hopefully it will give some insight into the science and
the people behind it."
A spokesperson for the University of East Anglia said: "We are aware that
information from a server used for research information in one area of
the university has been made available on public websites. Because of the
volume of this information we cannot currently confirm that all this
material is genuine. This information has been obtained and published
without our permission and we took immediate action to remove the server
in question from operation. We are undertaking a thorough internal
investigation and have involved the police in this inquiry."
In one email, dated November 1999, one scientist wrote: "I've just
completed Mike's Nature [the science journal] trick of adding in the real
temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and
from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."
This sentence, in particular, has been leapt upon by sceptics as evidence
of manipulating data, but the credibility of the email has not been
verified. The scientists who allegedly sent it declined to comment on the
email.
"It does look incriminating on the surface, but there are lots of single
sentences that taken out of context can appear incriminating," said Bob
Ward, director of policy and communications at the Grantham Research
Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of
Economics. "You can't tell what they are talking about. Scientists say
'trick' not just to mean deception. They mean it as a clever way of doing
something - a short cut can be a trick."
In another alleged email, one of the scientists apparently refers to the
death of a prominent climate change sceptic by saying "in an odd way this
is cheering news".
Ward said that if the emails are correct, they "might highlight behaviour
that those individuals might not like to have made public." But he added,
"Let's separate out [the climate scientists] reacting badly to the
personal attacks [from sceptics] to the idea that their work has been
carried out in an inappropriate way."
The revelations did not alter the huge body of evidence from a variety of
scientific fields that supports the conclusion that modern climate change
is caused largely by human activity, Ward said. The emails refer largely
to work on so-called paleoclimate data - reconstructing past climate
scenarios using data such as ice cores and tree rings. "Climate change is
based on several lines of evidence, not just paleoclimate data," he said.
"At the heart of this is basic physics."
Ward pointed out that the individuals named in the alleged emails had
numerous publications in peer-reviewed scientific journals. "It would be
very surprising if after all this time, suddenly they were found out
doing something as wrong as that."
Professor Michael Mann, director of Pennsylvania State University's Earth
System Science Centre and a regular contributor to the popular climate
science blog Real Climate, features in many of the email exchanges. He
said: "I'm not going to comment on the content of illegally obtained
emails. However, I will say this: both their theft and, I believe, any
reproduction of the emails that were obtained on public websites, etc,
constitutes serious criminal activity. I'm hoping the perpetrators and
their facilitators will be tracked down and prosecuted to the fullest
extent the law allows."
When the Guardian asked Prof Phil Jones at UEA, who features in the
correspondence, to verify whether the emails were genuine, he refused to
comment.
The alleged emails illustrate the persistent pressure some climatologists
have been under from sceptics in recent years. There have been repeated
calls, including Freedom of Information requests, for the Climate
Research Unit to make public a confidential dataset of land and sea
temperature recordings that is "value added" by the unit before being
used by the Met Office. The emails show the frustration some
climatologists have had at having to operate under such intense, often
politically motivated, scrutiny.
Prof Bob Watson, the chief scientific advisor at the Department for the
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said, "Evidence for climate change is
irrefutable. The world's leading scientists overwhelmingly agree what
we're experiencing is not down to natural variation."
"With this overwhelming scientific body of evidence failing to take
action to tackle climate change would be the wrong thing to do – the
impacts here in Britain and across the world will worsen and the economic
consequences will be catastrophic."
A spokesman for Greenpeace said: "If you looked through any
organisation's emails from the last 10 years you'd find something that
would raise a few eyebrows. Contrary to what the sceptics claim, the
Royal Society, the US National Academy of Sciences, Nasa and the world's
leading atmospheric scientists are not the agents of a clandestine global
movement against the truth. This stuff might drive some web traffic, but
so does David Icke."
--
Slavery: The belief that people can be property
Corporatism: The belief that property can be people.
Phlip
<editor.radiotalkingpoints....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh sure, you use a trick of science to hide the data?
The only thing worse than confusing a wingnut with facts is confusing
one with statistics.
Oh, look! Obama's polling at 27% today! Imagine that!!
Billary/2009
wrote:
Yeah but when your team hacked Sarah Palin's email you quiet oddly
quiet about it. I wonder why?
5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09
> Oh sure, you use a trick of science to hide the data? That made a lot
> of sense? If this was a ponzi scheme, the public would be demanding
> they be put in prisons the rest of their lives for deceiving them into
> spending billions they did not have to? Let me guess, the FBI will not
> be able to just ignore the implications of what these emails say?
>
Let's see: sixty-two megs of text, and all you have is ONE SENTENCE?
That's the sort of "evidence" you expect from demented cults.
Are you a demented cultist?
> What if the "hackers" turn out to be members of the military of Russia,
> who are conducting a training exercise, International agreements are
> so exciting, huh? Or just a good novel plot that will not involve the
> US military?
5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09
She was silly enough to put it on an easily hackable gmail account, using
one of her kids as a password.
Dänk 1010011010
wrote:
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/20/climate-sceptics-
> hackers-leaked-emails
>
> Climate sceptics claim leaked emails are evidence of collusion among
> scientists
>
> Hundreds of emails and documents exchanged between world's leading
> climate scientists stolen by hackers and leaked online
> Professor Michael Mann, director of Pennsylvania State University's Earth
> System Science Centre and a regular contributor to the popular climate
> science blog Real Climate, features in many of the email exchanges. He
> said: "I'm not going to comment on the content of illegally obtained
> emails. However, I will say this: both their theft and, I believe, any
> reproduction of the emails that were obtained on public websites, etc,
> constitutes serious criminal activity. I'm hoping the perpetrators and
> their facilitators will be tracked down and prosecuted to the fullest
> extent the law allows."
This is the first I've heard of the incident, so I'll need time to
formulate a more complete opinion. But it looks like the global
warming advocates are really upset that 'secret' documents were
leaked, as if climate data is proprietary information. They seem to
be almost as zealous as Scientologists, threatening lawsuits and
prosecutions to prevent the story of Xenu from being made public.
There is also a disturbing similarity to the Bush administration's
attempts to suppress scientific data that was inconvenient to
corporate interests. If global warming is a real phenomenon, then
there should be no problem publicizing ALL data.
Steve
It is pretty naive to expect honesty and integrity from leftists... Of
course there was nothing in Palin's e-mails that even raised
eyebrows... ...and now the lady is back, scaring the crap out of the
Democrats.
...Zepp's depends must be full....
Phlip
wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:28:23 -0800, Billary/2009 wrote:
> > On Nov 20, 9:16 pm, "5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > Yeah but when your team hacked Sarah Palin's email you quiet oddly quiet
> > about it. I wonder why?
>
> She was silly enough to put it on an easily hackable gmail account, using
> one of her kids as a password.
There the Left goes, always blaming the victim!
BTW the real answer is a candidate for office is volunteering for much
more aggressive scrutiny than someone just doing their job...
dave
> Oh sure, you use a trick of science to hide the data? That made a lot
> of sense? If this was a ponzi scheme, the public would be demanding
> they be put in prisons the rest of their lives for deceiving them into
> spending billions they did not have to? Let me guess, the FBI will
> not be able to just ignore the implications of what these emails say?
>
> Russia, who are conducting a training exercise, International
> agreements are so exciting, huh? Or just a good novel plot that will
> not involve the US military?
The downside of instant mass connectivity is the same as programmed
securities trading; no God factor.
5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09
Meanwhile, Billary is going to snivel that any transgression by "the
other side", no matter how much smaller in scale or even unrelated, gives
him the right to ignore all laws.
Will
wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:28:23 -0800, Billary/2009 wrote:
> > On Nov 20, 9:16 pm, "5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > Yeah but when your team hacked Sarah Palin's email you quiet oddly quiet
> > about it. I wonder why?
>
> She was silly enough to put it on an easily hackable gmail account, using
> one of her kids as a password.
So that justifies it,it was easy to do. Zepp logic at it's best.
5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09
Well, let's compare it with this. In this instance, they had to actually
break into a server. Not exactly just one clown screwing around and
hitting the bonanza, is it?
And you may have noticed that the mainstream media didn't use any of the
material that one clown found in Palin's GMail account. I'm sure there
was all kinds of incriminating items and stuff that made Sarah look like
an idiot, because that happens in all of her endeavors.
Now, we have, not a password guess at an email account, but a crime that
required significant resources, knowledge, and planning. It wasn't the
privacy of a public figure abusing her private account to do public
business on the sly, but the private communications of hundreds and
perhaps thousands of private individuals. And rather than blowing it off
as a political dirty trick, the right wing media have been making a
banner headline, out of one sentence fragment taken from 62 megabytes of
text.
Still want to insult our intelligence and your ethics by trying to
pretend they're equivalent, jasper?
5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09
> On Nov 20, 7:16 pm, "5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09" <d...@dead.com>
> wrote:
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/20/climate-sceptics-
>> hackers-leaked-emails
>>
>> Climate sceptics claim leaked emails are evidence of collusion among
>> scientists
>>
>> Hundreds of emails and documents exchanged between world's leading
>> climate scientists stolen by hackers and leaked online ...
>> Professor Michael Mann, director of Pennsylvania State University's
>> Earth System Science Centre and a regular contributor to the popular
>> climate science blog Real Climate, features in many of the email
>> exchanges. He said: "I'm not going to comment on the content of
>> illegally obtained emails. However, I will say this: both their theft
>> and, I believe, any reproduction of the emails that were obtained on
>> public websites, etc, constitutes serious criminal activity. I'm hoping
>> the perpetrators and their facilitators will be tracked down and
>> prosecuted to the fullest extent the law allows."
>
> This is the first I've heard of the incident, so I'll need time to
> formulate a more complete opinion. But it looks like the global warming
> advocates are really upset that 'secret' documents were leaked, as if
> climate data is proprietary information. They seem to be almost as
> zealous as Scientologists, threatening lawsuits and prosecutions to
> prevent the story of Xenu from being made public.
It's private emails and notes that were stolen. 62 megs worth, from a
breached server.
>
> There is also a disturbing similarity to the Bush administration's
> attempts to suppress scientific data that was inconvenient to corporate
> interests. If global warming is a real phenomenon, then there should be
> no problem publicizing ALL data.
So you approve of mandating that ALL private notes and emails of the Bush
administration be opened for scrutiny?
Steve
<de...@dead.com> wrote:
You don't get to mandate anything, Jamieson. Consider yourself lucky
that we (yes, we) let you stay in the USA.
David Hartung
As I recall, when Sarah Palin's email account was hacked, our friend
Zepp was more interested in some imagined scandal rather than in the
fact that someone had illegally broken into a private email. Now that
the shoe is on the other foot, he is singing a different tune.
5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09
>
> As I recall, when Sarah Palin's email account was hacked, our friend
> Zepp was more interested in some imagined scandal rather than in the
> fact that someone had illegally broken into a private email. Now that
> the shoe is on the other foot, he is singing a different tune.
My only interest there was that she was apparently using the private
account to conduct official state business, which of course is against
the law.
However, the interest was limited by the fact that the material, found
the way it was, would be inadmissable in a court of law. Pity, that.
So I take it you think that the fact that this happened to Palin excuses
the deliberate breaching of a server firewall and the stealing of
thousands of emails from hundreds of private individual?
Is that what you're telling us, David?
Steve
He was only recently jumping with joy about his fantasy that Sarah
Palin was getting divorced... Gotta wonder how his neighbors reacted
to those earthquakes...
Steve
<de...@dead.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:21:10 -0600, David Hartung wrote:
>
>>
>> As I recall, when Sarah Palin's email account was hacked, our friend
>> Zepp was more interested in some imagined scandal rather than in the
>> fact that someone had illegally broken into a private email. Now that
>> the shoe is on the other foot, he is singing a different tune.
>
>My only interest there was that she was apparently using the private
>account to conduct official state business, which of course is against
>the law.
'cept is isn't any of your business, alien loser.
>However, the interest was limited by the fact that the material, found
>the way it was, would be inadmissable in a court of law. Pity, that.
>
>So I take it you think that the fact that this happened to Palin excuses
>the deliberate breaching of a server firewall and the stealing of
>thousands of emails from hundreds of private individual?
>
>Is that what you're telling us, David?
<ROTFLMAO> Awww, did the poor little global warming frauds get caught
being dishonest?
Too bad.. If the global warming frauds are going to be dishonest, it
isn't the slightest bit dishonest to catch them at it..
David Hartung
> So I take it you think that the fact that this happened to Palin excuses
> the deliberate breaching of a server firewall and the stealing of
> thousands of emails from hundreds of private individual?
>
> Is that what you're telling us, David?
Did I justify anything?
A felony is a felony.
It is wrong to break into the email account of a Global climate
researcher as it is to break into the email account of a politician.
5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09
> 5279 Dead, 412 since 1/20/09 wrote:
>
>> So I take it you think that the fact that this happened to Palin
>> excuses the deliberate breaching of a server firewall and the stealing
>> of thousands of emails from hundreds of private individual?
>>
>> Is that what you're telling us, David?
>
> Did I justify anything?
>
> A felony is a felony.
So kiting a check for $250 is exactly the same as murdering 20 people,
right? After all, a felony is a felony.
>
> It is wrong to break into the email account of a Global climate
> researcher as it is to break into the email account of a politician.
Ah, false equivalence. I thought you right wingers didn't like that very
much.
RHF
> Editor RadioTalkingPoints wrote:
> > Oh sure, you use a trick of science to hide the data? That made a lot
> > of sense? If this was a ponzi scheme, the public would be demanding
> > they be put in prisons the rest of their lives for deceiving them into
> > spending billions they did not have to? Let me guess, the FBI will
> > not be able to just ignore the implications of what these emails say?
>
> > What if the "hackers" turn out to be members of the military of
> > Russia, who are conducting a training exercise, International
> > agreements are so exciting, huh? Or just a good novel plot that will
> > not involve the US military?
>
- the same as programmed securities trading;
- no God factor.
Dave in the Year of Our Lord 2009
that would be "The Obama Factor"
pbhhn ~ RHF
.
dave
YOUR Lord perhaps...
I, being an American, have no lords.
Billary/2009
Poor Zippy knows no limits to his hypocrisy. No wonder we laugh at him.
RHF
> RHF wrote:
> > On Nov 21, 6:08 am, dave <d...@dave.dave> wrote:
> >> Editor RadioTalkingPoints wrote:
> >>> Oh sure, you use a trick of science to hide the data? That made a lot
> >>> of sense? If this was a ponzi scheme, the public would be demanding
> >>> they be put in prisons the rest of their lives for deceiving them into
> >>> spending billions they did not have to? Let me guess, the FBI will
> >>> not be able to just ignore the implications of what these emails say?
> >>> What if the "hackers" turn out to be members of the military of
> >>> Russia, who are conducting a training exercise, International
> >>> agreements are so exciting, huh? Or just a good novel plot that will
> >>> not involve the US military?
- - - The downside of instant mass connectivity is
- - - the same as programmed securities trading;
- - - no God factor.
- - Dave in the Year of Our Lord 2009
- - that would be "The Obama Factor"
- - pbhhn ~ RHF
- - .
- YOUR Lord perhaps...
- I, being an American, have no lords.
*translation* Real Americans Have NO Gods !
=ps= Dave Tell that to Prez Obama
and the 'omo'ites
{OMO : On My Obama}
Dave -hence- the- "No God factor"
Dave so the american founding fathers
who you claim were 'deists' {deism}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
-but- As you claim were NOT christians
{had a 'god-factor'}
[A "Deity" Higher Than Themselves]
-and- thus Unalienable {In-Alienable} Rights
do not come from Our Creator [Deity]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rights
-and- Thus Can Not Be Abrogated by Man
and Man's Laws
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unalienable_rights
-but- are subject to the whims of man and
man's laws.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence
=either= You are as American as Them {the
Founding Fathers} and are at least a 'Deist'
-or- You are an Un-Amercian {Non-Deist}
'pretender'.
Dave by-your-own-words and your-own-logic
You Can Not Have It Both Ways
-and- be intellectually honest with yourself
dave - to your-own-self be true ~ RHF
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_of_Man
.