The internet is on fire this morning with confirmation computers at one of the world’s leading climate research centres were hacked, and the information released on the internet.
A 62 megabyte zip file, containing around 160 megabytes of emails, pdfs and other documents, has been confirmed as genuine by the head of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, Dr Phil Jones.
In an exclusive interview with Investigate magazine’s TGIF Edition, Jones confirms his organization has been hacked, and the data flying all over the internet appears to have come from his organisation.
“It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads of data files and emails.”
One of the most damning e-mails published comes from Dr. Jones himself. In an e-mail from almost exactly ten years ago, Jones appears to discuss a method of overlaying data of temperature declines with repetitive, false data of higher temperatures:
From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@[snipped], mhughes@
[snipped]
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@[snipped],t.osborn@[snipped]
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 [sic] from1961 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
Every 'scientist' who had a hand in this should be shamed at the least. And should be thrown out of whatever position they hold for fraud and screwing with the information.
3 comments:
I am skeptical about "anthropogenic global warming" and have been for a while ... but "skeptical" only in the sense that "I'm unconvinced the situation is as bad as they think it is." I do think global climate is shifting, and the shift will probably be for the worse, and human activities do have something to do with it. I have always dismissed the claims of an active pro-AGW conspiracy among scientists as fever dreams from "Area 51" type wackos. I like to think that scientists are at least honest in what they do -- possibly mistaken in their conclusions, but never malicious.
This story hurts. I don't want to believe it. But so far it doesn't look good at all. And if it's true, if they've really been fudging and falsifying data, and intentionally censoring the scientific press, then heads should roll in large quantities.
We must be able to trust our scientists and engineers.
Hell, guy, I don't like it; these people have a huge influence in our lives by what they say and how their work is used, as well as influencing teaching. AND our understanding of how things work. Which is why something like this has to be rooted out: they've not only lied about this particular matter in order to influence/control people's lives, they've given people reason to distrust most scientists("Hell, those people lied for years about this, so why should we trust you on that?")
Question becomes "WILL the scientific community deal with this honestly and openly?" And unfortunately, I'm skeptical; look what they tried to do to Lomborg for daring to argue against the 'proper' belief; makes you have serious questions as to whether they'll honestly deal with people who faked/slanted data for the 'right' cause.
And I don't doubt you know all that; I'm just blowing off steam.
Post a Comment