Hacked: Hadley CRU FOI2009 Files (Lubo Motls)
Eric Gisin
The Hadley climate center has been hacked or reviewed by a whistleblower who could no longer stand
the dirt and the files have been freely posted. If you want to download an interesting 62-megabyte
file, which unpacks to 156 megabytes or so, here are some links:
Megaupload (captcha, wait)
File dropper (captcha only)
Original URL (FTP in Russia, defunct)
Don't worry. Those 4,556 files in various directories contain no viruses or malware; I have tested
it. Stories and discussions:
Anthony Watts (selected correspondence)
Steve McIntyre ( - || - )
Terry Hurlbut (Examiner)
Jeff Id (The Air Vent, the first story)
Other blogs (Blog Search)
Google News (Hot Air, a WSJ blog, American Thinker...)
It remains to be seen whether the files are authentic. No clear errors have been found and your
humble correspondent would bet that the files are authentic. Why? Well, it's just pretty difficult
to type 156 MB of stuff that looks so legitimate. (See the end of this article for Jones'
confirmation of authenticity.) When you unpack the ZIP file, you create two directories,
"documents" and "mail". For example, "documents" has these files and subfolders:
[image: file browser]
You really don't want to type all these files by hand. Each subdirectory contains either numerous
subfolders or dozens of DOC, PRO, TXT, no-suffix, ARS, CRN, CRNS, DAT, RAW, and other files. I
don't know anyone who could create such an amount of authentic things in a finite affine time. The
only alternative explanation to veracity is that the bulk of the files is real and some "cherries"
have been added or edited. But that would still require a collaboration of a good hacker with a
good person who follows climate science (a well-informed skeptic), or the unification of these two
roles in one person. Somewhat unlikely.
The 7-MB "mail" subfolder contains 1073 TXT files with e-mails and it is the main focus of most
people who want to look. ;-) There are lots of e-mails in between Briffa, Mann, Revkin, Singer,
Peiser, and many other people you know. Before you read the e-mail messages, I recommend you to
merge all the TXT files into one TXT file, e.g. by the DOS command "type *.* > ..\hademail.txt"
launched in the "mail" directory.
There are many things to love about these e-mails. For example, the word "funded" appears roughly
66 times over there. Stepan Shiyatov instructs his colleagues about the optimal ways to commit tax
evasion:
... That is why it is important for us to get money from additional sources, in particular from
the ADVANCE and INTAS ones. Also, it is important for us if you can transfer the ADVANCE money on
the personal accounts which we gave you earlier and the sum for one occasion transfer (for example,
during one day) will not be more than 10,000 USD. Only in this case we can avoid big taxes and use
money for our work as much as possible. Please, inform us what kind of documents and financial
reports we must represent you and your administration for these money....
But I liked the following description of Phil Jones' 1999 methodology, taken from Michael Mann. He
is proudly telling the MBH authors:
From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,ma...@virginia.edu, mhu...@ltrr.arizona.edu
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.br...@uea.ac.uk,t.os...@uea.ac.uk
Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim's got a diagram here we'll send that either later today or first thing tomorrow. I've
just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years
(ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline. Mike's series got the annual
land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are
real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate
for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998. Thanks for the comments, Ray.
Cheers
Phil
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.j...@uea.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK
When we talk about tricks, this message is even more entertaining by its honesty and chosen
vocabulary:
From: Gary Funkhouser
To: k.br...@uea.ac.uk
Subject: kyrgyzstan and siberian data
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 15:37:09 -0700
Keith,
Thanks for your consideration. Once I get a draft of the central and southern siberian data and
talk to Stepan and Eugene I'll send it to you.
I really wish I could be more positive about the Kyrgyzstan material, but I swear I pulled every
trick out of my sleeve trying to milk something out of that. It was pretty funny though - I told
Malcolm what you said about my possibly being too Graybill-like in evaluating the response
functions - he laughed and said that's what he thought at first also. The data's tempting but
there's too much variation even within stands. I don't think it'd be productive to try and juggle
the chronology statistics any more than I already have - they just are what they are (that does
sound Graybillian). I think I'll have to look for an option where I can let this little story go as
it is.
Not having seen the sites I can only speculate, but I'd be optimistic if someone could get back
there and spend more time collecting samples, particularly at the upper elevations.
Yeah, I doubt I'll be over your way anytime soon. Too bad, I'd like to get together with you and
Ed for a beer or two. Probably someday though.
Cheers, Gary
Gary Funkhouser
Lab. of Tree-Ring Research
The University of Arizona
Tucson, Arizona 85721 USA
phone: (520) 621-2946
fax: (520) 621-8229
e-mail: ga...@ltrr.arizona.edu
Gary Funkhouser has tried and done a lot but his stomach capacity for fraud is apparently smaller
than in the case of Jones, Mann, and similar thugs, so you can't be surprised that Funkhouser is
less famous a climate scientist.
By the way, "FOI" in the file name stands for "Freedom Of Information", a bill in the U.S. The
e-mails are full of Phil Jones' and other tricks how to circumvent the FOIA legislation: search for
"FOIA".
Read it. The conclusion looks pretty clear. These people should be put in jail as soon as possible.
You know, these are not just small tricks in an academic discussion. These people have acquired
millions if not billions of taxpayers' money by methods that seem to be provably fraudulent.
Update: legitimate
Phil Jones, the main criminal according to this correspondence, has personally confirmed that the
website was hacked and that the documents are authentic. See Briefing Room.
He says that he "can't remember" what he meant by "hiding the decline." Well, let me teach him some
English.
It means that if he hadn't done the "trick", the actual data would show a decline (of the
temperature, in various intervals, as described in the e-mail). The decline of the temperature is
also known as the cooling. There was one cooling period according to the thermometers, between the
1940s and 1970s, but reconstructions of the temperatures via the same trees that are used in
paleoclimatology also show cooling since the 1980s in many or most cases. But by doing the "trick"
and adding some different data, the decline disappeared. In other words, it was "hidden" by the
"trick".
This procedure is also known as "scientific fraud".
Posted by Lumo at 7:56 AM
BDR-529
Q
--
Type-2 diabetes since July 2009, 1000 mg/day metformin, BMI 26.3
JohnM
> You should become a script writer for Disney movies.
>
Truly amazing. It will be entertaining to see how many denialists get
sucked in by this kind of kookiness.
Eric Gisin
Why don't you green fascists just admit what evil scum you are and commit mass suicide for Gaia?
"BDR-529" <el@wood> wrote in message news:4b06ed94$0$22903$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
Ouroboros Rex
Yep - there was code in the files. Wait till the code is examined and
found legit. How they will howl conspiracy then! lol
Eric Gisin
are proof that Environmentism is not just religion, but that you are truely insane (ie
schizophrenia).
There are not enough mental hospitals for all the Green and Islamist religious fanatics.
"JohnM" <john_howa...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3f60aeed-366c-45eb...@j19g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 20, 8:27 pm, BDR-529 <el@wood> wrote:
> You should become a script writer for Disney movies.
>
> Eric Gisin wrote:
> >http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/11/hacked-hadley-cru-foi2009-files.html
>
>
Green Turtle
news:4b06ed94$0$22903$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
>
Oh, but the funny part is your side is providing this maternal in its
original format!
Talk about free entertainment....
The source maternal is REAL, and it certainly can be considered science
fiction...
The disregard for the science process here is going to haunt your side for
years...
It just a bunch of hoar's....
To anyone at any other institution...go out an purchase a jump drive, and
then talk to someone in IT and ask them how to pull a copy of their email
servers...we need more of this stuff in public...you know, that supposed
thing called REAL peer review...
And, really, we should start offering real $$ to people working at places
like NASA etc. to give us a copy of all their corresponds...after all, they
are on the public dole...we have a right see all this stuff since we paying
for it...
Super Turtle
I M @ good guy
<spamt...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
>Peter Muehlbauer <spamt...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
>
>> "Eric Gisin" <gi...@uniserve.com> wrote:
>>
>> > http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/11/hacked-hadley-cru-foi2009-files.html
>>
>> [Sorry for the big snip, but I want to bring into focus again....]
>>
>> > Phil Jones, the main criminal according to this correspondence, has personally confirmed that the
>> > website was hacked and that the documents are authentic. See Briefing Room.
>> >
>> > He says that he "can't remember" what he meant by "hiding the decline." Well, let me teach him some
>> > English.
>> >
>> > It means that if he hadn't done the "trick", the actual data would show a decline (of the
>> > temperature, in various intervals, as described in the e-mail). The decline of the temperature is
>> > also known as the cooling. There was one cooling period according to the thermometers, between the
>> > 1940s and 1970s, but reconstructions of the temperatures via the same trees that are used in
>> > paleoclimatology also show cooling since the 1980s in many or most cases. But by doing the "trick"
>> > and adding some different data, the decline disappeared. In other words, it was "hidden" by the
>> > "trick".
>>
>> ... the above mentioned 1980s.
>>
>> http://img.umweltluege.de/curious1.png
>>
>> Really seems like the mentioned trick.
>>
>> http://img.umweltluege.de/curious1.png
>
>Should be http://img.umweltluege.de/curious2png
>
>
>> > This procedure is also known as "scientific fraud".
>>
>> This also rises the question of how many other sources have been "overworked"
>> the same way?
>> Maybe they should also hack the other "data centers of AGW".
With the cru emergency server running, it may mean
government is investigating and needs full access to all
RAID hard drives.
I was told that deleting any emails can be a crime,
I only delete them in my folder to remove spam and to
make room, the web mail software will only allow so
many emails, although I have 50 megs available.
I suspect a lot of people are not aware of the
complete record retained on unix servers and the
detail of every leg of the email being handed off
across the globe.
Some spam hackers are really sophisticated,
and some are dumb enough to use their real email
address, but the unix server allows seeing the
entire header with the unix email programs.
I M @ good guy
<spamt...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
>I hope so.
>But that's UK only and I may leave that unspecified, what THAT government will
>possibly find out.
>
>But US government should also act now and do the same at NASA et al. before
>they're able to delete all their data.
>
>
>> I was told that deleting any emails can be a crime,
>> I only delete them in my folder to remove spam and to
>> make room, the web mail software will only allow so
>> many emails, although I have 50 megs available.
>
>This is governmental data, yes.
>I don't think that private emails, just like yours and mine are affected.
>
>> I suspect a lot of people are not aware of the
>> complete record retained on unix servers and the
>> detail of every leg of the email being handed off
>> across the globe.
>>
>> Some spam hackers are really sophisticated,
>> and some are dumb enough to use their real email
>> address, but the unix server allows seeing the
>> entire header with the unix email programs.
>
>Even -ix systems are not invulnerable, even if the -ix freaks strongly persist
>they are.
>A clever fraudster does never use his real address.
>What you see in the headers is only the From:-field. This is a text header
>field only and may contain whatever you want.
That is not true, on the unix server, I can see
exactly who sent the email, plus the route, each
leg with a separate "received from" field.
This allows ISPs to take steps to end the abuse,
if a guy tried to get me to give him my personal
information, I don't care how much trouble he gets
into. Look at some of the email headers posted
in this thread, there might even by a received from
field of a IP address and userID number.
At least one of the unix mail readers has
a keypress option "h" that turns on full headers,
which may not be available in any windows browser
or any "offline" email program.
>What you can't see at first go is the Envelope-From:-field, that contains,
>what servers expect to be the real sender address and what they use for
>routing tables.
>But it won't be transferred to your client, so you'll never know where the
>email really comes from (normal case).
Don't do anything illegal with that wrong information,
sometimes I get email that shows 3 or 4 received from
fields, the last one down is the original sender, it may
be coded by his server, but his ISP or whomever owns
the computer he sends the email from can identify him
from the header.
Those that think of mischief should also take
this information and think twice before trying anything,
I get a lot of spam, it stopped for a long time, but
is beginning to get worse now, the suckers buying
email lists will get busted or at least lose mail
privileges if the server owner gets complaints,
and even the server owner is subject to letters
or even lose of internet access if the abuse gets
bad enough or involves illegal acts, especially
if across state lines in the US, world wide or
internationally it may even be worse.
HardySpicer
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:01:06 +0100, Peter Muehlbauer
>
>
>
> <spamtrap...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
> >"I M @ good guy" <I...@good.guy> wrote:
>
> >> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:52:27 +0100, Peter Muehlbauer
>
> >> >Peter Muehlbauer <spamtrap...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
>
> >> >> "Eric Gisin" <gi...@uniserve.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> >http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/11/hacked-hadley-cru-foi2009-files.html
>
> >> >> [Sorry for the big snip, but I want to bring into focus again....]
>
> >> >> > Phil Jones, the main criminal according to this correspondence, has personally confirmed that the
> >> >> > website was hacked and that the documents are authentic. See Briefing Room.
>
> >> >> > He says that he "can't remember" what he meant by "hiding the decline." Well, let me teach him some
> >> >> > English.
>
> >> >> > It means that if he hadn't done the "trick", the actual data would show a decline (of the
> >> >> > temperature, in various intervals, as described in the e-mail). The decline of the temperature is
> >> >> > also known as the cooling. There was one cooling period according to the thermometers, between the
> >> >> > 1940s and 1970s, but reconstructions of the temperatures via the same trees that are used in
> >> >> > paleoclimatology also show cooling since the 1980s in many or most cases. But by doing the "trick"
> >> >> > and adding some different data, the decline disappeared. In other words, it was "hidden" by the
> >> >> > "trick".
>
> >> >> ... the above mentioned 1980s.
>
> >> >>http://img.umweltluege.de/curious1.png
>
> >> >> Really seems like the mentioned trick.
>
> >> >>http://img.umweltluege.de/curious1.png
>
I found a link to the files
I M @ good guy
Just as soon as I find time to set up a new machine
with a separate hard drive for downloading zip files,
there will probably be a lot of others I would download
first.
You can be sure that government will either
make this whole thing transparent and patent, or
cover it up big time, either way the hacker(s) will
be prosecuted if found.
A smoking gun is not needed to detect AGW BS.
BDR-529
It all sounds a little bit like Disney script writing to me, AGW deniers
will accomplish nothing with their meaningless smear jobs.
Q
I M @ good guy
You seem to be confused, all anybody can do is
wait to see what the school administration does.
Who cares, the whole lot produce nothing useful.
I M @ good guy
<spamt...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
>Not really.
>You won't see the
>Envelope-From:
>inside your mail header, because this is for server internal processing only.
>
>You can imagine it like this:
>The SENDER writes you a mail. He writes a FROM and TO onto this sheet of paper
>and puts this into an envelope with the real sender's address and the address
>of his ISP mail server. The ISP mail server uses the routing to the receiver's
>mail server from the address on the envelope.
>
>The receiver's server now opens the envelope and forwards the content to the
>TO field address, discarding the envelope.
>This is the reason why you receive spam obviously from "yahoo.com" or
>"microsoft.com", because the servers don't work with the FROM: field.
>You may write into the FROM: field whatever you want, i.e.
>Donal...@entenhausen.cn.quack
>
>The only thing you can "guess" where it comes from is the received field, but
>those "servers" are mostly faked names and won#t exist more than a day or so.
>
>See that typical real spam header
>
>********************************************
>
>Return-Path: <0.sh...@239.76.broadband4.iol.cz>
>X-Spam-Flag: YES
>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on s1.2precision.net
>X-Spam-Level: ************
>X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=12.5 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,
> RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100,RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100,RAZOR2_CHECK,RCVD_IN_PBL,
> RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB,RCVD_IN_XBL,XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_3AC1D
>autolearn=failed
> version=3.2.5
>X-Spam-Report:
> * 1.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is a abuseable web server
> * [85.71.76.239 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
> * 2.9 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL
> * [85.71.76.239 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
> * 0.5 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL
> * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/)
> * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence
>level
> * above 50%
> * [cf: 100]
> * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50%
> * [cf: 100]
> * 1.3 XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_3AC1D XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_3AC1D
> * 4.2 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook
>X-Envelope-To: <xxxspam...@frankenxxxexpress.xxxde>
>Received: from 239.76.broadband4.iol.cz (239.76.broadband4.iol.cz
>[85.71.76.239])
> by s1.2precision.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id nAHG6WGg018255
> for <xxxspam...@frankenxxxexpress.xxxde>; Tue, 17 Nov 2009
>17:06:34 +0100
>Received: from [93.164.51.162] (helo=mpwccmnktsoh.mxiwqrrtq.va)
> by 239.76.broadband4.iol.cz with esmtpa (Exim 4.69)
> (envelope-from )
> id 1MMDEH-7016zh-SK
> for xxxspam...@frankenxxxexpress.xxxde; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:06:32
>+0100
>Message-ID: <2246174345.Q...@gcvvxszffxr.rjkdmy.va>
>
>(changed my address here)
>********************************************
>
>This
>
>Received: from [93.164.51.162] (helo=mpwccmnktsoh.mxiwqrrtq.va)
> by 239.76.broadband4.iol.cz with esmtpa (Exim 4.69)
> (envelope-from )
> id 1MMDEH-7016zh-SK
>
>is the only clue, but it is mostly unreliable.
>Might be a temporary installed private server.
Don't you think the owner of the IP has a record of
the users and requires a login with password?
If it is a static IP address the poster is using, the
162 alone may be enough to identify him.
There are/may-be server owners who offer crooks
access, but if much crime is committed, they will probably
lose internet access.
HardySpicer
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:20:24 +0100, Peter Muehlbauer
>
>
>
> <spamtrap...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
> >"I M @ good guy" <I...@good.guy> wrote:
>
> >> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:01:06 +0100, Peter Muehlbauer
> >> <spamtrap...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
>
> >> >"I M @ good guy" <I...@good.guy> wrote:
>
> >> >> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:52:27 +0100, Peter Muehlbauer
>
> >> >> >Peter Muehlbauer <spamtrap...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> "Eric Gisin" <gi...@uniserve.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> >http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/11/hacked-hadley-cru-foi2009-files.html
>
> >> >> >> [Sorry for the big snip, but I want to bring into focus again....]
>
> >> >> >> > Phil Jones, the main criminal according to this correspondence, has personally confirmed that the
> >> >> >> > website was hacked and that the documents are authentic. See Briefing Room.
>
> >> >> >> > He says that he "can't remember" what he meant by "hiding the decline." Well, let me teach him some
> >> >> >> > English.
>
> >> >> >> > It means that if he hadn't done the "trick", the actual data would show a decline (of the
> >> >> >> > temperature, in various intervals, as described in the e-mail). The decline of the temperature is
> >> >> >> > also known as the cooling. There was one cooling period according to the thermometers, between the
> >> >> >> > 1940s and 1970s, but reconstructions of the temperatures via the same trees that are used in
> >> >> >> > paleoclimatology also show cooling since the 1980s in many or most cases. But by doing the "trick"
> >> >> >> > and adding some different data, the decline disappeared. In other words, it was "hidden" by the
> >> >> >> > "trick".
>
> >> >> >> ... the above mentioned 1980s.
>
> >> >> >>http://img.umweltluege.de/curious1.png
>
> >> >> >> Really seems like the mentioned trick.
>
> >> >> >>http://img.umweltluege.de/curious1.png
>
>
> >The only thing you can "guess" where it comes from is the received field, but
> >those "servers" are mostly faked names and won#t exist more than a day or so.
>
> >See that typical real spam header
>
> >********************************************
>
> >X-Spam-Flag: YES
> >X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on s1.2precision.net
> >X-Spam-Level: ************
> >X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=12.5 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,
> > RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100,RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100,RAZOR2_CHECK,RCVD_IN_PBL,
> > RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB,RCVD_IN_XBL,XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_3AC1D
> >autolearn=failed
> > version=3.2.5
> >X-Spam-Report:
> > * 1.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB RBL: SORBS: sender is a abuseable web server
> > * [85.71.76.239 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net]
> > * 2.9 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL
> > * [85.71.76.239 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
> > * 0.5 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL
> > * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/)
> > * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence
> >level
> > * above 50%
> > * [cf: 100]
> > * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50%
> > * [cf: 100]
> > * 1.3 XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_3AC1D XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_3AC1D
> > * 4.2 FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK Forged mail pretending to be from MS Outlook
> >Received: from 239.76.broadband4.iol.cz (239.76.broadband4.iol.cz
> >[85.71.76.239])
> > by s1.2precision.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id nAHG6WGg018255
> >17:06:34 +0100
> >Received: from [93.164.51.162] (helo=mpwccmnktsoh.mxiwqrrtq.va)
> > by 239.76.broadband4.iol.cz with esmtpa (Exim 4.69)
> > (envelope-from )
> > id 1MMDEH-7016zh-SK
> >+0100
> >Message-ID: <2246174345.QT9EKM6Y402...@gcvvxszffxr.rjkdmy.va>
>
> >(changed my address here)
> >********************************************
>
> >This
>
> >Received: from [93.164.51.162] (helo=mpwccmnktsoh.mxiwqrrtq.va)
> > by 239.76.broadband4.iol.cz with esmtpa (Exim 4.69)
> > (envelope-from )
> > id 1MMDEH-7016zh-SK
>
> >is the only clue, but it is mostly unreliable.
> >Might be a temporary installed private server.
>
> Don't you think the owner of the IP has a record of
> the users and requires a login with password?
>
> If it is a static IP address the poster is using, the
> 162 alone may be enough to identify him.
>
> There are/may-be server owners who offer crooks
> access, but if much crime is committed, they will probably
> lose internet access.
Yes but I expect the hacker will be from Russia or some such.
Hardy
I M @ good guy
Or maybe one of the present or past IT technicians
at CRU.
chemist
<spamtrap...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
> "Eric Gisin" <gi...@uniserve.com> wrote:
> >http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/11/hacked-hadley-cru-foi2009-files.html
>
> [Sorry for the big snip, but I want to bring into focus again....]
>
> > website was hacked and that the documents are authentic. See Briefing Room.
>
> > He says that he "can't remember" what he meant by "hiding the decline." Well, let me teach him some
> > English.
>
> > It means that if he hadn't done the "trick", the actual data would show a decline (of the
> > temperature, in various intervals, as described in the e-mail). The decline of the temperature is
> > also known as the cooling. There was one cooling period according to the thermometers, between the
> > 1940s and 1970s, but reconstructions of the temperatures via the same trees that are used in
> > paleoclimatology also show cooling since the 1980s in many or most cases. But by doing the "trick"
> > and adding some different data, the decline disappeared. In other words, it was "hidden" by the
> > "trick".
>
>
> http://img.umweltluege.de/curious1.png
>
> Really seems like the mentioned trick.
>
> http://img.umweltluege.de/curious1.png
>
>
> the same way?
> Maybe they should also hack the other "data centers of AGW".
Peter,How do the tree rings compare with Sunspots?
There appears a close relationship.
george
<spamtrap...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
> time to look over them more closely.
> However the problem I see, independently from the actual Briffa/Yamal
> discussion, is the data taken from living organisms in a steadily changing
> environment depending on a lot of growth-enhancing and growth-impeding factors
> that are not related to the Sun, like nutrition, wind conditions and so on.
> I don't like to question the credibility of this data, but first impression is
> that it is apt for a Yes/No statement at best, not for a statement of
> quantity.
> I rather prefer Be10 ice core isotope data going back for a few thousand
> years, but not from depths more than a few ten meters to avoid the same
> decompression fate as for deep drilled ice cores.
>
> regardless of tree rings, there are a lot of other sources that show a strong
> solar signal. Tree rings, if not showing exactly the opposite, would only be
> another example in addition to the others
Is there a program out there that we can use to look at the included
data ourselves?
I noticed in some of the emails a certain reluctance to accept the
data without 'massaging' it
I M @ good guy
wrote:
Chances are there are lots of different types of
database files, some are plain DOS or linux text files,
but some may be comma separated data with different
types of fields, or some other characters to separate
the data.
What damages the data issue is that it comes
from several different sources, and seems to be
assembled haphazardly.
But a look at the UAH data set in text gives
the impression that nothing much has changed
in the last 30 years.
george
<spamtrap...@AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote:
> A simple MS-Excel program is enough, if you're familiar with it's features.
>
> For example, solar-to-temperature correlation can be seen in any data set
> available.
> That meets PDO, Be10, Sun's UV output <300nm, solar cycles, and even a very
> small sweeping signal of about <10 ppmv in CO2 data.
>
> To keep the overview, I simply used the GISSdsst and HadCRU3 here.
>
> http://img.umweltluege.de/curious1.png
> (Correlation T[GISS] to SSN = 0,62 1900-1979)
> (Correlation T[HadCRUT3] to SSN = 0,64 1900-1979)
> (Correlation T[GISS] to SSN = 0,11 over all)
> (Correlation T[HadCRUT3] to SSN = 0,08 over all)
>
> You can clearly see the solar signal long-term hamonizing with temperature.
> Until about 1980, when suddenly a huge divergence is seen.
> Where does that come from?
> Why this suddenly disharmony?
> There are several options (ok, there are a lot more).
>
> a) Transition to satellite measurements?
> b) Beginning of AGW hype and fraud?
>
> and what you called
>
> c) massaged data?
>
> Just make up your own opinion on what happens, when I take a startpoint at
> 1980 and simply turn the data upside down using the startpoint as baseline.
>
> http://img.umweltluege.de/curious2.png
> (Correlation T[GISS] to SSN = 0,62 1900-1979)
> (Correlation T[HadCRUT3] to SSN = 0,64 1900-1979)
> (Correlation T[GISS] to SSN = 0,72 over all)
> (Correlation T[HadCRUT3] to SSN = 0,64 over all)
>
> Doesn't that look more natural again?
> Not least correlation factor speaks volumes.
> As I said, you can do this with almost all data with the same result.
> And, after I had a look at the McIntyre tree ring graph, which shows about the
> same result *downward* as in Pic #2, I'm almost sure that data HAS been
> fudged.
>
> And FYIhttp://www.climateaudit.org/?p=6932
> Kaufman and Upside-Down Mann
Thanks. When I get a free hour or so......
Ouroboros Rex
Day 4, still no fraud found. lol
george
> Chances are there are lots of different types of
> database files, some are plain DOS or linux text files,
> but some may be comma separated data with different
> types of fields, or some other characters to separate
> the data.
>
> What damages the data issue is that it comes
> from several different sources, and seems to be
> assembled haphazardly.
>
> But a look at the UAH data set in text gives
> the impression that nothing much has changed
> in the last 30 years
It seems to me that the data upon which the Global Warming claims are
based has been sorted and filtered by the advocates of Global Warming.
The fact is that of course the Earth is going through a warming
phase.
Otherwise we would still be in the Wurm (for one) glaciation with some
5000 feet of icesheet over northern Europe.
I notice however that there are messages referred to that are
missing..
So I'd guess that we haven't got the full picture yet.
I M @ good guy
wrote:
>On Nov 23, 11:43 am, "I M @ good guy" <I...@good.guy> wrote:
>
>> Chances are there are lots of different types of
>> database files, some are plain DOS or linux text files,
>> but some may be comma separated data with different
>> types of fields, or some other characters to separate
>> the data.
>>
>> What damages the data issue is that it comes
>> from several different sources, and seems to be
>> assembled haphazardly.
>>
>> But a look at the UAH data set in text gives
>> the impression that nothing much has changed
>> in the last 30 years
>
>It seems to me that the data upon which the Global Warming claims are
>based has been sorted and filtered by the advocates of Global Warming.
Of course, nobody else sees much of an issue, even
if CO2 concentrations are increasing.
>The fact is that of course the Earth is going through a warming
>phase.
>Otherwise we would still be in the Wurm (for one) glaciation with some
>5000 feet of icesheet over northern Europe.
And North America.
>I notice however that there are messages referred to that are
>missing..
>So I'd guess that we haven't got the full picture yet.
Chances are none of the other files will ever be
released unless they are used in a courtroom, maybe
some person who has been damaged by any collusion
could file suit and ask the files be made part of the
public record.
george
> Chances are none of the other files will ever be
> released unless they are used in a courtroom, maybe
> some person who has been damaged by any collusion
> could file suit and ask the files be made part of the
> public record
On that one point there will be no claims of slander or libel as then
ALL the emails on all the Servers will become evidence and the global
warming by human cliche will be exposed