Merged AGW Team email and files hacked and on interrnet?

[mhaze]

Quoting The Examiner:

http://www.examiner.com/x-28973-Essex-County-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m11d19-Hadley-CRU-hacked-with-release-of-hundreds-of-docs-and-emails

The University of East Anglia's Hadley Climatic Research Centre appears to have suffered a security breach earlier today, when an unknown hacker apparently downloaded 1079 e-mails and 72 documents of various types and published them to an anonymous FTP server. These files appear to contain highly sensitive information that, if genuine, could prove extremely embarrassing to the authors of the e-mails involved. Those authors include some of the most celebrated names among proponents of the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

For some reason, the files leaked are described as "Leaked FOIA files". (File name: FOI2009.zip)

Not sure whether that means they were files previously requested or in process of being released under FOIA or what.

But are they real files or fake?

One of many discussions, this one by Motl:

http://motls.blogspot.com/

 

[Ziggurat]

But are they real files or fake?

I'm seeing reports that they are real.

 

[Poptech]

As someone mentioned to me these emails have apparently been obtained illegally and I do not know if the JREF is OK with that material being reproduced here (we have allowed similar "whistle blower" stuff to be posted here before). So until such time as I get a response from the JREF please do not reproduce any of the material here.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[Darat]

To all participants, I have re-started this thread and I am not placing it on [Moderated Status]. However if you post in this thread and breach your Membership Agreement you will be suspended without any further warning.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat

 

[Abdul Alhazred]

Wanna talk about the global warming hacker?

http://skepticalcommunity.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?p=497579#497579

 

[BobK]

Darat hasn't unlocked the other thread yet so I'll put this here.

Bishop Hill provides a short synopsis with links to some of the more interesting emails.

 

[Darat]

Oops - sorry for creating this thread as a closed thread - when you copy an opening post the new thread inherits the open/closed status of the original.

Posted By: Darat

 

[gtc]

Here is an interesting blog article about the emails (reposted from earlier thread).

 

[BenBurch]

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/11/i-read-through-160000000-bytes-of.html

Sums up the issue and, shows the character of those pushing it, and lays it to rest.

 

[Poptech]

Sums up the issue and, shows the character of those pushing it, and lays it to rest.

Ben, why did you link to an economically illiterate site? Too funny.

 

[mhaze]

Here is an interesting blog article about the emails (reposted from earlier thread).

I think a rather interesting aspect of this entire matter - which your article makes me reflect on - is the interest of the world community. The people.

As follows:

1. AGW true believers claim that a near totalitarian control must be placed on the carbon emissions of everyone or else the world heats up, blah blah blah.

2. AGW true believers and a certain group of politicians work together to implement this plan.

3. The CRU is hacked and emails released which show the propping up of weak scientific ideas, attempts to stifle dissent, and so forth.

4. Now #1 and #2 must be re evaluated. Not a small matter.

5. The release of the emails serve the public interest. Any other conclusion is ridiculous.

 

[mhaze]

Darat hasn't unlocked the other thread yet so I'll put this here.

Bishop Hill provides a short synopsis with links to some of the more interesting emails.

That does appear to be the shaping up of a sane and comprehensive look at the emails.

I agree (as noted in the other, currently closed thread) with the comment made in Biship Hill that Trenberth comes across as the lone, true scientist.

 

[volatile]

http://carbonfixated.com/newtongate...in-of-renaissance-and-enlightenment-thinking/

:-D

"If you own any shares in companies that produce reflecting telescopes, use differential and integral calculus, or rely on the laws of motion, I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the calculus myth has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after volumes of Newton’s private correspondence were compiled and published.


When you read some of these letters, you realise just why Newton and his collaborators might have preferred to keep them confidential. This scandal could well be the biggest in Renaissance science. These alleged letters – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists behind really hard math lessons – suggest:
Conspiracy, collusion in covering up the truth, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more."

 

[PixyMisa]

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/11/i-read-through-160000000-bytes-of.html

Sums up the issue and, shows the character of those pushing it, and lays it to rest.

Agreed on that point; I see no evidence for scientific fraud.

But the blatant disregard for FOIA requests is rather more disturbing. I don't know the exact details of the law or the requests themselves, but you don't play games like that when your research is guiding public policy.

 

[mhaze]

Agreed on that point; I see no evidence for scientific fraud.

But the blatant disregard for FOIA requests is rather more disturbing. I don't know the exact details of the law or the requests themselves, but you don't play games like that when your research is guiding public policy.

Excepting of course, for the previous, ongoing investigation into scientific fraud on the part of Phil Jones and Wang, which is openly discussed in these emails, and which is related to Jones's curious paranoia about FOI requests?

Now why did you leave that out?

 

[volatile]

Now why did you leave that out?

I know! I know! Pick me! Is it because AGW is a giant hoax?!

 

[jsfisher]

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/11/i-read-through-160000000-bytes-of.html

Sums up the issue and, shows the character of those pushing it, and lays it to rest.

I don't think I would have used a straw man fallacy to construct the definitive analysis on the subject, but I'm not a journalist, so what do I know.

 

[PixyMisa]

Excepting of course, for the previous, ongoing investigation into scientific fraud on the part of Phil Jones and Wang, which is openly discussed in these emails, and which is related to Jones's curious paranoia about FOI requests?

Now why did you leave that out?

Because I don't know enough about it.

I'm not sure what's going on with this investigation you mention, but the FOI issues are sufficient in themselves to warrant a public inquiry.

 

[mhaze]

Because I don't know enough about it.

I'm not sure what's going on with this investigation you mention, but the FOI issues are sufficient in themselves to warrant a public inquiry.

Makes sense. Here is the background story on Jones/Wang vs. Keenan.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/05/03/climate-science-fraud-at-albany-university/

Briefly - looks like Wang made up some data, then Jones covered for him, then Albany tried to cover it up, then Keenan filed criminal complaint. But now in these emails what is public is....

"Jones's side of the story"

But yes, I agree with your central point, FOI is not to be gamed for the advantage or supposed self interest of a government paid researcher.

 

[Meed]

Excepting of course, for the previous, ongoing investigation into scientific fraud on the part of Phil Jones and Wang, which is openly discussed in these emails,

Jones and Wang certainly didn't think it was fraud, judging by the emails.