As most regular readers will know I'm a climate change sceptic. This morning one of my lovely readers sent me the link to a blog he reads regularly.
It appears the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (the provider of much of the government's information pumped out to citizens), has been hacked and many many files have been released by the hacker or persons unknown.
Start here for details of the incident and continue onto this blog to read some of the emails and comments. You should have a good picture of the situation by then.
If this is authentic information, and many think it is, then it blows the whole climate change issue to pieces.
Posts
25 comments:
Certainly the insider leak was genuine but the press had not been officially notified by 9am this morning ( nor the PMs Office for that matter ).
NB by this afternoon they had identified the computer within Hadley from where the leak came.
Climate Change - Are We Being Deceived?
Yes we are and now we have them.
I only just saw the DEFRA reference on your link SR, coincidentaly DEFRA have a large regional centre just a couple of miles from the Met Office, at Clyst St. Mary, Devon.
Ah so the emails etc are genuine then banned. It's kind of 50/50 in the comments on some sites.
Well QM you know me, always willing to listen to other sides of the argument. ;)
Soz for the multiple comments but love this comment on whatsupwithat.com
"TerryMN (18:46:14) :
Good old Phil….
From: Phil Jones ( Hadley/Met Office )
To: Tom Wigley
Subject: Re: FOIA
Date: Fri Jan 21 15:20:06 2005
Cc: Ben Santer
Tom,
I’ll look at what you’ve said over the weekend re CCSP.
I don’t know the other panel members. I’ve not heard any
more about it since agreeing a week ago.
As for FOIA Sarah isn’t technically employed by UEA ( University Of East anglia ) and she
will likely be paid by Manchester Metropolitan University.
I wouldn’t worry about the code. If FOIA does ever get
used by anyone, there is also IPR to consider as well.
Data is covered by all the agreements we sign with people,
so I will be hiding behind them. I’ll be passing any
requests onto the person at UEA who has been given a post to
deal with them.
Cheers
Phil
Climate is a particular study of my old career. The whole political rubbish comes from The UK Met Office's arrogant attempts to become commercial leaders in this field. Now the fact they struggle from one day to nother to get a local forecast correct, something tells us their computer models aren't much cop. Still tax is tax, climate or not!
15:35
SR, dunno about the veracity of the e-mails as posted but the fact of the major insider leak is genuine. I know because at 8am this morning the Met Office Communications Group ( ie Corporate Propaganda ) were running scared about it.
The leaky computer incidentally belongs to a certain Professor.
http://bit.ly/3gxK4f
DK has some hot (Excuse the pun) info as well
Thanks LotF. For other readers DK details one of the emails which he thinks is important.
Far too much to trawl through all in one sitting with the links I gave, so it's worth a visit to DK.
Oh Glorious Irony!
Think of all that aviation fuel being burned and CO2 being emitted into the stratosphere with all the junket party people going to Copenhagen for no fucking reason!
Are we being decieved? Yes.
Glorious irony right enough Bug. You can visualise all the propagandists rushing around trying hard to stifle the evidence can't you?
Of course we are John and I'm pleased so many people will now perhaps start to question what we're fed rather than just eat it.
The floods in Cumbria were described on the BBC lunchtime news as the worst for a 1000 years! How the fu-k do they know????
Didn't you know some in the BBC and the Met Office are dinosaurs DL?
Just been spreading the word about Wardog closing his blog thanks to allegations from the bloody News of the World Rosa.
PS another Hootsmon if you want it.
Is he closing it? Auch damn!
I'm convinced of the reality of climate change - whether man made or part of a natural cycle. I'm also convinced that politicians will use climate change to take more of people's money and increase their dictatorial powers over us mere mortals.
What is unfortunate is that the issue has descended into a yaboo political slugfest between rival views.
Oh I'm convinced about climate change scunnert but I'm not convinced about Global Warming (now known as climate change).
There are far too many scientists on the make about this now and that invalidates so much of their work in my opinion.
I like my science to come from independent sources if possible.
Just a couple of potential problems with this one...
1. If you already mistrust climate change reports from the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit - which it sounds like you do - then what's to say that these 'hacked' ones are any more reliable?
2. Do they really contridict the findings of hundreds of international scientists and research bodies such as the IPCC to the extent that all the mountains of evidence they have produced that suggest human-influenced climate change can be safely discounted?
Keith a couple of answers from me.
1 I have no proof that the hacked ones are reliable but they will be tested I'm sure. Also they must be original because No 10 was informed of the 'hack' this morning. Strange to tell them if the material wasn't genuine.
2 I don't contradict the findings of anyone. I read it and decide on the evidence put before me. It's only in recent times that I've had enough sense to research the writer of the findings and the greatest majority of them have political affiliations. My preference is for independent reports.
3 I believe in climate change. I don't believe in the hysteria being pumped through every media channel there is. Also I believe a portion of climate change is natural - the figure of man made varies from the sublime to the cor blimey.
I expect a rash of FOI requests have been submitted since this story broke. It will be interesting to see how the warmist fanatics get around those, given that their strategies for avoiding them are now in the public domain.
The website mentioned in the emails, RealClimate, issued a refutation last night. It's bollocks, of course. They proffer that the emails might've been doctored!
Let's hope the whistle-blower is not found.
Sorry OR, missed your comment. Now that is interesting because there's quite a bit about the MO in these emails etc.
Aye they would say that wouldn't they Fausty? They just won't give up but I think there's enough evidence to call their bluff and enough folk on the case.
That was my first thought. But the whistleblower seems to have an excellent command of IT so may well have managed to cover their tracks.
Post a Comment