Climategate 2

I'm away from my desk, so this is just a placeholder until I can get home, get hold of the files, and make some comment.

Comments

[matthu]

This is a comment from the front page of RealClimate:

We have not succeeded in answering all our problems. The answers we have found only serve to raise a whole set of new questions. In some ways we feel we are as confused as ever, but we believe we are confused on a higher level and about more important things.

It could have been about the recent release of emails, but it's not ...

[TheBigYinJames]

Great set of emails, but I can't help feeling the euphoria will dissipate when it gets ignored by the MSM, unreported, patched over and ultimately ignored. There's too much political entrenchment in the current policies to back out now. I hope I'm wrong.

[TheBigYinJames]

Richard Black has updated his original story, this time making big noise about "A hacker entered a backup server at the university and downloaded a file containing administrative passwords" - really? This has been proved?

I sense the Team rebuttal is going to focus (once again) on an unproven allegation of illegality, instead of addressing the content. It got them off the hook last time, why not?

[Phillip Bratby]

Richard Black is clearly making it up as he goes along. What inside information does he have about the "hack" that Mr Plod doesn't have?

[ZT]

3935.txt, amid its general plotting, says that Roger Harrabin is on the advisory board of the Tyndall.

"1. Media involvement. I would suggest Roger Harrabin might be a better (alternate?) invitee to Alex Kirby. Simon Torok has recently had contact with him about media coverage of Jo'berg and he is also on the Advisory Board of Tyndall."

So - no conflict of interest there then. (In addition to the 15,000 pounds).

[Latimer Alder]

@James

You may be a little overpessimistic.

Dellers remarks and the 96 comments already made are highlighted now at the Telegraph webiste.

I can only imagine that Geoffrey Lean was out to lunch so could not throw his toys around and demand that Delingpole be silenced.

And Loopy Lou Gray is permanently Out To Lunch, but a few sandwiches short of a picnic.....

Even the grauniad has a link to 'breaking news'

[matthu]

The Guardian now has the story:

Prof Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Centre at Penn State University, who is quoted in the batch of released emails described the release as "truly pathetic".

When asked if they were genuine, he said: "Well, they look like mine but I hardly see anything that appears damning at all, despite them having been taken out of context. I guess they had very little left to work with, having culled in the first round the emails that could most easily be taken out of context to try to make me look bad."

He said, the people behind the release were "agents doing the dirty bidding of the fossil fuel industry know they can't contest the fundamental science of human-caused climate change. So they have instead turned to smear, innuendo, criminal hacking of websites, and leaking out-of-context snippets of personal emails in their effort to try to confuse the public about the science and thereby forestall any action to combat this critical threat. Its right out of the tried-and-true playbook of climate change denial."

[Richard Drake]

I'm with Latimer on this. It's not Shangri La in itself but it could still prove pretty deadly for the consensus-builders. The inquiry question raises its head again - at a very bad moment for Penn State for a start. It's hilarious to read about Oxburgh on the inside of FOIA2011. It's certainly embarrassing, maybe a lot more. And it's better to travel in hope, because none of us knows which straw will break this particularly stubborn camel's back.

[View from the Solent]

The .....ru/download.php URL now returns a 404

[TheBigYinJames]

It's been mirrored around a bit already, probably just busted the server load, no need to suspect foul play.

[Bernie]

The Mann quotation is priceless. I bet he saw nothing "damning" in the first cache of emails. The paranoia about the oil industry is also revealing.

[Richard Drake]

Here's something much more interesting to me than Mann's foolishness in the Guardian's report:

One marked difference from the original 2009 release is that the person or persons responsible has included a message headed "background and context" which, for the first time, gives an insight into their motivations. Following some bullet-pointed quotes such as "Over 2.5 billion people live on less than $2 a day" and, "Nations must invest $37 trillion in energy technologies by 2030 to stabilise greenhouse gas emissions at sustainable levels," the message states:

"Today's decisions should be based on all the information we can get, not on hiding the decline. This archive contains some 5.000 emails picked from keyword searches. A few remarks and redactions are marked with triple brackets. The rest, some 220.000, are encrypted for various reasons. We are not planning to publicly release the passphrase. We could not read every one, but tried to cover the most relevant topics."

The use of points instead of commas to mark the thousands when writing a number – highly unusual in both the UK or US – is sure to lead to speculation about the nationality of those responsible.

It's good to see the Guardian, as a left-wing rag, forced to confront the stated motivation of FOIA - with the poorest centre stage. Dig here, in every possible way.

[Latimer Alder]

Re Mike Mann's comments (reported by Matthu above)

If anybody wanted to do a parody of the 'great man', they'd be hard pushed to beat him at ho=is own game.

But buried within the hilarity, he hopes you won't notice that he admits that they are real.
Is it all possible that there is actually a brain under his knockabout slapstick? Penn State's answer to BoJo?

And I wonder how poor Phil is feeling today. Last time we are told he was tempted to self-harm. I suggest that his minders keep hi away from sharp objects for may months.

[Phillip Bratby]

Just because Mann isn't paranoid doesn't mean people are not out to get him. Or something.

[Cumbrian Lad]

The russian server seems to have given in to the pressure. It topped 980 dowloads about 15:30 and it's serving an error message now.

[Mac]

I think these clutch of emails are beginning to snare others, Oxburgh, Harrabin, et al.

We are beginning to see a bigger picture of those involved promoting the CAGW narrative in the media and those who can be relied upon to support and protect the CAGW narrative.

Climategate I made people realise how uncertain the science was and also highlighted scientific malpractice.

Climategate II highlights how people were profoundly unhappy in what they were doing and saying, but also illuminates what they tried to do to protect themselves from criticism and accusations of wrong doing.

These new emails give substance to the arguement that there is something rotten at the heart of climate science. No inquiry or review can now eradicate that particular smell.

[Bernie]

A quick Google shows that periods are used by the Germans and Dutch in writing large numbers. Other languages may also adopt this approach rather the typical comma in English speaking countries.

Are there technical fiels where this usage predominates?

[Fred B]

Wow there are so many quotable examples of scientific corruption. Christmas has come early.

[James P]

"I wonder how poor Phil is feeling today."

I'm sure his Mum will be along shortly with a health report...

[James P]

Unfortunately for RC, their fox has been shot..

Mann:

"the important thing is to make sure they’re loosing the PR battle. That’s what
the site [Real Climate] is about."

[Anteros]

Just a thought for those wondering whether the full-stops between the numbers means anything. Step back a moment and consider that this release has taken TWO YEARS. Some resourceful, bright and technically minded people have had that length of time to create that message.

If any fingerprints were left on it, I think you can be sure they were PUT there with extremely good reasons. Same with the password - don't even think about it!

[Mac]

Spare a thought for the Norfolk Police - they seem to be no nearer to solving whether they are dealing with a leak or a hack.

[Green Sand]

Anteros

"passphrase" not "password"

[James P]

Mac - at least it will give the Fuzz a chance to present another invoice. Just in time for Christmas, too!

[Anteros]

Green Sand

Fair point.... but a fiver still says it won't be found :0

[matthu]

Can anyone come up with an innocent explanation for the following turn of phrase?

[2775] Jones:

I too don’t see why the schemes should be symmetrical. The temperature ones
certainly will not as we’re choosing the periods to show warming.

Most peculiar.

[James Evans]

An insight into the original mind of Michael Mann:

He does a quick scan of the newly released emails, where this must surely have caught his attention:

"<3373> Bradley:
I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should
never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year
'reconstruction'."

He then gives the Grauniad an instant quote:

"Prof Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Centre at Penn State University, who is quoted in the batch of released emails described the release as 'truly pathetic'."

[Jiminy Cricket]

If is does gain any momentum with Parliament, then rather than just taking Jones out the first time as the required but ignored result, it will take many more out this time.

These emails appear far more serious in light of the first ones and the subsequent evidence to inquiries,

Maybe having those joke inquiries was not such a bad idea after all? :-)

[Green Sand]

Anteros

"but a fiver still says it won't be found :0"

I am not taking you on, the reason why I raised it is that to me "passphrase" means "don't even bother".

Could be wrong though, there will be a lots of people with capabilty and access to mega computing power that will be trying very hard, so can never say never.

Not sure whats going on with the 220k encrypted are they just personal and of no contribution or are they something else? Having spent years asking for data to be made public, yet again we are subjected to somebody else's form of censorship? So I do have mixed feelings about this. Don't get me wrong what I have read just further confirms what has been going on is just plain wrong!

[geronimo]

I feel the same about these as I did about Climategate 1. They will be ignored by the MSM, and if they are investigated the same results will ensue. The establishment never has a problem with bare-faced skulduggery when dealing with the oicks.

Don't be optimistic we'll get to a point where the politicos express doubts any time soon.

[Dave Salt]

Does anyone know the original dates that these emails were created?

I ask because, if memory serves, the set leaked in 2009 were supposed to be a first batch of a set but I don't recall reading anything about further releases until now. Could these be the remaining batch of the original 2009 set or are they something completely new?

I read Jones' reference to AR5 and so suspect it could be the latter.

[Viv Evans]

This mail from the AirVent caught my eye:

"<4443> Jones:

Basic problem is that all models are wrong – not got enough middle and low
level clouds."

Thank you, Phil Jones!

Send this to your MPs - here's proof that we are being made to pay through the nose for policies based on wrong models. And who better to know that Phil Jones!

[Niklas]

1680.txt

date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:03:05 -0400
from: "Michael E. Mann" <mann@meteo.psu.edu>
subject: Re: Something not to pass on
to: Phil Jones <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>

<x-flowed>
Phil,

I would not respond to this. They will misrepresent and take out of
context anything you give them. This is a set up. They will certainly
publish this, and will ignore any evidence to the contrary that you
provide. s They are going after Wei-Chyung because he's U.S. and there
is a higher threshold for establishing libel. Nonetheless, he should
consider filing a defamation lawsuit, perhaps you too.

I have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an
investigative journalist to investigate and expose McIntyre, and his
thusfar unexplored connections with fossil fuel interests.Perhaps the
same needs to be done w/ this Keenan guy.

I believe that the only way to stop these people is by exposing them and
discrediting them.

Do you mind if I send this on to Gavin Schmidt (w/ a request to respect
the confidentiality with which you have provided it) for his additional
advice/thoughts? He usually has thoughtful insights wiith respect to
such matters,

mike

[Mark, Edinburgh]

Note the first Black web version said the UEA inquiries had found nothing wrong with the science, whereas his latest version more correctly says the inquiries merely found that the UEA did not act fraudulantly.

Black surely knows his first version was disengenuous, which suggests either there is hopefully now an editor at the BBC looking over his shoulder, or maybe he is just recyling UEA press office material and the latter are being a bit more careful?

[Mac]

read this

3791.txt

date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 19:49:18 -0000 (GMT)
from: “Tim Osborn”
subject: RE: FW: FOI_08-50 ; EIR_08-01
to: “Jones Philip Prof”

Hi Phil!

re. your email to Dave Palmer [which he copied in his response to you and
cc'd to me, Keith & Michael McGarvie, and which has hence already been
multiply copied within the UEA system, and therefore will probably exist
for a number of months and possibly years, and could be released under FOI
if a request is made for it during that time!]… I assume that you didn’t
delete any emails that David Holland has requested (because that would be
illegal) but that instead his request merely prompted you to do a spring
clean of various other emails that hadn’t been requested, as part of your
regular routine of deleting old emails. If that is what you meant, then
it might be a good idea to clarify your previous email to Dave Palmer, to
avoid it being misunderstood.

The way things seem to be going, I think it best if we discuss all FOI,
EIR, Data Protection requests in person wherever possible, rather than via
email. It’s such a shame that the skeptics’ vexatious use of this
legislation may prevent us from using such an efficient modern technology
as email, but it seems that if we want to have confidential discussions
then we may need to avoid it.

I shall delete this email and those related to it as part of my regular
routine of deleting old emails!

Cheers

Tim

and compare to this

<2459> Osborn:

Keith and I have just searched through our emails for anything containing
“David Holland”. Everything we found was cc’d to you and/or Dave Palmer, which
you’ll already have.

[Mike Fowle]

Isn't it joyous to see these models of scientific integrity at work. A lesson for our children.

[Rog Tallbloke]

Someone calling themselves Joe Public has put a torrent link on my blog.

[Summertown]

Regarding the Guardian's comment that "The use of points instead of commas to mark the thousands when writing a number – highly unusual in both the UK or US – is sure to lead to speculation about the nationality of those responsible", it's not clear to me that this sheds any light on the nationality of the leaker/hacker, for the writer of that ReadMe file uses a point rather than a comma in “Over 2.5 billion people live on less than $2 a day." If a German, for example, were to have written it, it would have been "Over 2,5 billion..."

[Mac]

EXPLOSIVE Niklas

I (Mann) have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an
investigative journalist to investigate and expose McIntyre, and his
thusfar unexplored connections with fossil fuel interests.Perhaps the
same needs to be done w/ this Keenan guy.

I believe that the only way to stop these people is by exposing them and
discrediting them.

Do you mind if I send this on to Gavin Schmidt (w/ a request to respect
the confidentiality with which you have provided it) for his additional
advice/thoughts? He usually has thoughtful insights wiith respect to
such matters,

[simpleseekeraftertruth]

Last time it was about the team. This time a much bigger picture is revealed. I hope the Bish's new book hasn't hit the presses yet.

[Green Sand]

Niklas Nov 22, 2011 at 4:53 PM

1680.txt

Thanks Niklas, that is going to get a lot of not only "blog time" but also "air time"

[Mac]

It would appear the Team sought to hire an investigative journalist to expose McIntyre as being in the pay of Big Oil in order to discredit him.

Now that is EXPLOSIVE!

[James Evans]

A poster called Niklas put this up at TallBloke's place:

"2368.txt

date: Wed Dec 3 13:31:06 2008
from: Phil Jones
subject: Re: FW: FOI_08-50 ; EIR_08-01
to: “Palmer Dave Mr \(LIB\)”

Dave,
Do I understand it correctly – if he doesn’t pay the £10 we don’t have to respond?

With the earlier FOI requests re David Holland, I wasted a part of a day deleting
numerous emails and exchanges with almost all the skeptics. So I have
virtually nothing. I even deleted the email that I inadvertently sent.
There might be some bits of pieces of paper, but I’m not wasting my time
going through these.

Cheers
Phil"

According to the UEA website, Dave Palmer seems to be the "Information Policy and Compliance Manager". I take it that he is responsible for ensuring that FOI regs are followed.

Niklas also posts this:

"3791.txt

date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 19:49:18 -0000 (GMT)
from: “Tim Osborn”
subject: RE: FW: FOI_08-50 ; EIR_08-01
to: “Jones Philip Prof”

Hi Phil!

re. your email to Dave Palmer [which he copied in his response to you and
cc'd to me, Keith & Michael McGarvie, and which has hence already been
multiply copied within the UEA system, and therefore will probably exist
for a number of months and possibly years, and could be released under FOI
if a request is made for it during that time!]… I assume that you didn’t
delete any emails that David Holland has requested (because that would be
illegal) but that instead his request merely prompted you to do a spring
clean of various other emails that hadn’t been requested, as part of your
regular routine of deleting old emails. If that is what you meant, then
it might be a good idea to clarify your previous email to Dave Palmer, to
avoid it being misunderstood.

The way things seem to be going, I think it best if we discuss all FOI,
EIR, Data Protection requests in person wherever possible, rather than via
email. It’s such a shame that the skeptics’ vexatious use of this
legislation may prevent us from using such an efficient modern technology
as email, but it seems that if we want to have confidential discussions
then we may need to avoid it.

I shall delete this email and those related to it as part of my regular
routine of deleting old emails!

Cheers

Tim"

[mikef2]

....as I lost out to Don M in the worn out cliche race over at Watts, can I have a go at being the first with "its worse than we thought" here.
Thank you...you may all now continue. My work is done.

[James Evans]

:) Oh, hello Niklas. I was just talking about you. Should refresh the page before posting.

[Mike Jackson]

Can I suggest we try to follow established practice and redact email addresses before posting?
Tempting as it might be to "stalk" some of these guys (!) that way lies trouble and we (hopefully) adhere to a more gentlemanly standard of behaviour.
I reckon the Bishop would probably agree with me.

[Rog Tallbloke]

Someone calling themselves Joe Public has put a torrent link on my blog.

[Bernie]

Niklas:
Nice find! If there is one person that I personally would not want to make really mad at me it is Steve McIntyre. His tenacity, amazing recall and lawyer-like precison are scary good. Mann may wish that he had kept his stick out of that particualr hornets' nest.

[I am curious black]

Tranche.

Interesting word. You don't come across it very often.

yet the 'tranche" of emails is mentioned in Leo Hickman's Guardian Piece and Richard Black's BBC piece (neither of which says anything about the content of the emails).

Curious

[matthu]

Bob Ward in Times Higher Supplement

Bob Ward, policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at London School of Economics, noted the timing of the leak ahead of next week’s climate change summit in South Africa.

“The selective presentation of old email messages is clearly designed to mislead the public and politicians about the strength of the evidence for man-made climate change, in the hope that governments will stop their efforts to reach an agreement on international action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” he said.

Dismissing the idea that the emails cast any doubt on the existence and causes of climate change, he said: “These emails, like the last batch, show that climate researchers are human and prone to the same rivalries and disputes that occur in many professions.”