On 24 February 2010 08:56, Craig van Nieuwkerk <[email protected]> wrote:
> > really eye popping reading. Conspiracy to delete data, fudge data and > > models, ensuring the deletion of mail at Hadley and uPen on impending > > If you take 10 years of emails and correspondence between people in an > organisation and pick out a few little bits here and there you can > pretty much come up any conclusion you want about someone. The email > leaks were meaningless unless you have read ALL of it and been across > ALL of their research and correspondence. > > For example, your email above says "ensuring the deletion of mail". I > can take this to mean you are trying to cover up some nefarious deed > by telling people you are emailing around "ensuring the deletion of > mail". Of course not, because I have totally take it out of context, > just like the emails from the scientists above. > God this sounds like something straight off realclimate. Before saying the above, I think you need to *READ* the CRU e-mails and source. Seriously. The material is dreadful. *Beyond dreadful*. "You cannot make this stuff up" dreadful. There is NOTHING in the UEA leak/hack archives along the lines of your "ensuring deletion of mail" example. Check this stuff from Phil Jones (the currently (voluntarily) stood down head of the CRU at UEA) ... stuff in [ and ] is from me: "And don't leave stuff lying around on ftp sites - you never know who is trawling them. The two MMs [ referring to McKitrick and McIntyre - the main hockey stick debunkers ] have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone." "The UK works on [Freedom of Information] precedents, so the first request will test it. We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind. Tom Wigley has sent me a worried email when he heard about it - thought people could ask him for his [ climate ] model code. He has retired officially from UEA so he can hide behind that." "Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. He's not in at the moment - minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don't have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise. I see that CA [ climateaudit.org ] claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!" Phl Jones, Dec 3, 2008: "About 2 months ago I deleted loads of emails, so have very little – if anything at all." Phil Jones, Nov 24, 2009 in The Guardian "We’ve not deleted any emails or data here at CRU." "If anything, I would like to see the climate change happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the consequences. This isn’t being political, it is being selfish." "I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" "Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal," -- (Mann not Jones) “I will be emailing the journal [where the editor is sympathetic to a skeptical view point] to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.” "We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I [ Phil Jones ] make the data available to you [ Australian scientist Warwick Hughes ] , when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it. There is IPR to consider. " All very scientific and entirely out of context as you suggest, right? From the HEAD of the Climate Research Unit at University of East Anglia. Read the original mails yourself - they're widely available on the 'net. When you're done with that have a crack at some of the source code. It'd be different if this was from some inconsequential bit player - but it is not. Again, of course, none of this disproves any particular scientific theory re AGW. "If you take 10 years of emails and correspondence between people in an organisation and pick out a few little bits here and there you can pretty much come up any conclusion you want about someone." The above is not a 'few bits here and there' and it is just what I pulled up over a few quick google searches on the UEA archive. I am happy to say there is nothing like any of the above in my inbox or sent items. -- David Connors ([email protected]) Software Engineer Codify Pty Ltd - www.codify.com Phone: +61 (7) 3210 6268 | Facsimile: +61 (7) 3210 6269 | Mobile: +61 417 189 363 V-Card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors Address Info: https://www.codify.com/contact
