Hatton, IMO, the authenticity of the "emails" should be empirically verified before the debate even begins; otherwise they're invalid as evidence of anything else other than someone went to a great deal of trouble to produce a lot of text files.
These wouldn't hold up in a court of law, why even debate until authenticity is proven. -----Original Message----- From: C. Hatton Humphrey [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 2:20 PM To: cf-community Subject: Re: climategate emails > > Hmm.... no headers, nothing to prove that they actually came from East > Anglia...... fishy > "The authenticity of these emails has been confirmed by most of the relevant parties including the CRU at Univeristy of East Anglia and many of the authors. These emails contain some quite surprising and even disappointing insights into what has been happening within the climate change scientific establishment. Worryingly this same group of scientists are very influential in terms of economic and social policy formation around the subject of climate change." I'm not going to go out and say that "they told us these are authentic" is completely validating... these are, however, the texts that are being discussed and debated according to the footer on this same page. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:308880 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
