Broadband Tech > Security > Security > Climate Change Scandal Erupts After Email Hack.

Climate Change Scandal Erupts After Email Hack.

Climate change scientists have been manipulating and fixing data according to bloggers that are spreading information contained in hundreds of hacked emails.

Bloggers say the 62 mb worth of emails were hacked from the Climate Research Unit, part of Britain’s University of East Anglia and released onto the Internet. The file containing the emails were packaged and posted on blogs by an anonymous hacker.

“We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps,” said the hacker on the climate skeptic site Air Vent on Friday. “We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and document.”

The file contained data, code, and emails from Phil Jones, director of Britain's leading Climate Research Unit (CRU), to and from many people. Jones confirmed to Investigate magazine's TGIF Edition Friday night that his organization had been hacked.

"It was a hacker,” Jones told TGIF. “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."

The blog "Watts up with that" said they had seen the file and it appeared to be genuine. “Others who have seen it concur—it appears genuine. There are so many files it appears unlikely that it is a hoax. The effort would be too great.”

The "No consensus" blog apparently had the files sent to their site as well.

“This is the biggest news ever broken here,” said the blog. “The first thing I have to say is that I have no connection to the source of these files. It was left as a link on my blog while I was hunting for cloaked deers (fruitlessly) in the Upper Penninsula. These files are real [in my opinion] but they cannot be one hundred percent verified as such.”

The emails are uploaded on a site called “an elegant chaos.”

In one email, scientists appear to admit they can't find the data to back up their global warming theory.

“Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record. We had 4 inches of snow. The high the last 2 days was below 30F and the normal is 69F, and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F. The low was about 18F and also a record low, well below the previous record low.

“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.”

Another email thread talks about manipulating data. It is apparently from Phil Jones.

“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.”

Another email talks of the potential to excluding some research contrary to the global warming theory.

“The other paper by MM is just garbage – as you knew. De Freitas again. Pielke is also losing all credibility as well by replying to the mad Finn as well – frequently as I see it. I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. K and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”

From The Guardian:
»www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2···d-emails

Climate change sceptics who have studied the emails allege they provide "smoking gun" evidence that some of the climatologists colluded in manipulating data to support the widely held view that climate change is real, and is being largely caused by the actions of mankind.

reply to iam x
»www.sophos.com/blogs/gc/g/2009/1···ch-unit/

reply to iam x
Daily Mail carries the story:
British climate change scientists 'conspired to keep sceptics in the dark'.
»www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article···ics.html

reply to VikingBob

reply to iam x
At least the hackers did this for a good cause: helping to further expose one of the biggest hoaxes of modern times.

^ QFT. So many unquestioning gullible people out there... but conversely, nice to see more than just a few thinking people as well, questioning information based on evidence rather than hype. Congrats to the hackers - more power to them in doing their part to expose this most dangerous fraud.

I would love to see Gore or any of these megalomaniacal charlatans go to prison for this farce - it would be a beautiful day... (I know I likely won't, but one can dare to dream ).

There seems to be some question as to whether this was the work of an anonymous hacker, or perhaps instead by an insider. Based on the quantity and scope of the material, the insider/whistle-blower theory is beginning to look more plausible. Perhaps a disgruntled employee (or former employee) decided that there was just too much deception and stonewalling going on to keep it all under cover.

Interesting times...
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own."

reply to iam x
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 orfirst 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

reply to hurleyp
Here is another theory about how the files were accessed that may be of interest to security-oriented readers.

"The CRUtape Letters®, an Alternate Explanation" presents a 3rd possibility other than hacker or insider:

»wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/23/t···anation/

...beware what you expose to the public.

Paul
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own."

reply to iam x
Screw Phil JONES of the University of East Anglia and Al Gore et al

and all hail Alex JONES and co' »www.infowars.com/call-for-indepe···mplodes/

DOWNLOAD/VIEW FULL FILES VIA »www.infowars.com/climatic-resear···ils-data and read the LIES etc for yourselves

Federal Reserve/Bankers/Corrupt Politicians etc etc, you're next

FIGHT THE POWER

reply to iam x

reply to iam x
Will Obama Sign Your Sovereignty Away in Copenhagen?

On October 14th, Lord Christopher Monckton gave a presentation at Bethel College in St. Paul, Minnesota during which he issued a dire warning regarding this "United Nations Climate Change Treaty".

An excerpt as reported by Canada Free Press

quote:

---

This upcoming December, U.S. President Barack Obama is scheduled to sign a treaty on climate change in Copenhagen, Denmark.

The former science adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher says that he has read the treaty and that it explicitly says that a world government is going to be created.

Is Barack Obama about to blatantly violate the U.S. Constitution by signing a document that gives up U.S. sovereignty without any debate or input from the people of the United States?

---

quote:

---

I read that treaty. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word "government" actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfaction of what is called, coyly, "climate debt"; because we've been burning CO2 and they haven't been screwing up the climate... And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement.

How many of you think that the word “election” or “democracy” or “vote” or “ballot” occurs anywhere in the 200 pages of that treaty? Quite right, it doesn’t appear once.

---

reply to CrxRed1

reply to fatness

A phrase?

I'm sure you can explain it to us better than that.

reply to iam x
fatness, [comment edited]Climate Change Scandal and exposing suppressed or "doctored" data .. not likely just a coincidence, considering the Treaty meeting coming in Copenhagen....

whack the post if it's not appropriate.
--
Gladiator Security Forum: www.gladiator-antivirus.com/

reply to nwrickert

reply to chachazz