I don’t think the leaked emails show a smoking gun (that anthropogenic global warming is a fiction) but what they demonstrate is that scientists are all too human in trying to bend evidence to suit their theory. They have been happy to try to shut down the debate by concealing evidence from colleagues they fear would interpret it differently and have indulged in crude smear tactics on opponents.

In short, they have not behaved like scientists seeking an objective truth- more like politicians trying to win an election.

Tragic really.

A single leaked email of dubious provenance which may or may not be genuine is hardly a smoking gun. And there is nothing in there that suggests that Jones was given his grant expressly in return for making certain predictions, or indeed that he has ever “predicted apocalypse” at all.

And I don’t see what is remotely suspicious about Mann’s email about the BBC. The BBC was guilty of poor journalism and as an expert in the field in question he naturally objected to that.

Wouldn’t want the PPC shutting LC down, would we?

Yeah, on balance, you’re right. Let’s supress the truth.

Who fucking needs it, right?

But it’s nice when you find evidence that seems to prove a theory.

When your income depends on that evidence standing up it’s even better……….

Aderess the substantive point.

The climate scientists, on whose integrity the globe is betting billions of pounds, have been found to be colluding in misinformation.

I don’t know whether AGW is a reality or not.

But their duplicity is shameful.

£14m

Is that veg?

You’re clearly a racist. Climate Change denial is now on the list….as is driving a car with an engine greater than 1.4 litres, leaving the tap running while brushing your teeth, watching the Cumbrian floods without rolling your eyes and sighing “so it begins..the fools..why wouldn’t they listen?”…and not drinking your own piss.

Hope your happy Dr Goebbels.

Can you give me the link?

Apparently Prof Jones (above) got a grant of £14m last year….

No wonder he wanted to “hide the decline”.

From: Michael Mann
To: Stephen H Schneider
Subject: Re: BBC U-turn on climate
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 09:00:44 -0400
Cc: Myles Allen , peter stott , “Philip D. Jones” , Benjamin Santer , Tom Wigley , Thomas R Karl , Gavin Schmidt , James Hansen , trenbert , Michael Oppenheimer

extremely disappointing to see something like this appear on BBC. its particularly odd, since climate is usually Richard Black’s beat at BBC (and he does a great job). from what I can tell, this guy was formerly a weather person at the Met Office.

We may do something about this on RealClimate, but meanwhile it might be appropriate for the Met Office to have a say about this, I might ask Richard Black what’s up here?

mike

OK. What about this from an email hacked from the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit.

From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@xxxxx.xxx, mhughes@xxxx.xxx
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@xxx.xx.xx,t.osborn@xxxx.xxx

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) xxxxx
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) xxxx
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jones@xxxx.xxx
NR4 7TJ
UK

The key sentence is “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.”

As I understand it Mike is Michael Mann of the famous fake hockey stick. “Hide the decline” refers to the fact that the earth is coooling not warming.

Read all here

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/19/breaking-news-story-hadley-cru-has-apparently-been-hacked-hundreds-of-files-released/

Discuss

It’s no more “theoretical” than the physics behind the steam engine. Yes, there is theory involved, but it’s not “theoretical” in the colloquial sense which you appear to be using. Just like gravity. I mean, if I say F=G((m1*m2)/R^2), that’s just theoretical, isn’t it?

And if you can’t keep up with 19th century physics yet publicly demand that someone explain it to you after it has already been explained to death in so many different venues that I find it hard to believe that anyone hasn’t been thoroughly exposed to said explanation, it’s not exactly surprising that you get insulted.

I’m entirely open to the discussion of better policy responses. It’s not really my area.

As opposed to trusting whom?

The problem is that scientists can not be trusted- particularly with areas of study where they’re paid to predict Armageddon.

Have you any evidence that anyone is being paid to predict armageddon? And what would the motive be?

What about, off thetop of my head, building more nuclear power stations and using more renewable power sources, carbon trading schemes, carbon capture and storage.

You also didn’t address my point about government. Why is it that the only solution governments have to try to curb our CO2 emissions is taxation and even then why do they never off-set taxes (for instance, bring in a green tax that will generate £5bn a year and simultaneously cut income tax by £5bn)?

Of course there is a legitimate debate regarding AGW

Quite true – there is a great deal of legitimate scientific debate about exactly how bad it will be and what precise regional impacts are likely, and there is also a great deal of legitimate policy debate about how we should tackle it. however, there is no more legitimate scientific debate about its existence than there is about the existence of gravity.