Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Twitter
Support

 

Recent posts
Recent comments
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Bob's strawman at CoJo | Main | Could be a long wait »
Thursday
Feb032011

Jones in Lincs

Phil Jones is speaking tomorrow to the Spalding Gentlemen's Society. There is a brief story in the local paper here.

One interesting snippet from the article is this quote by Jones:

I received a lot of nasty emails from November to March/April last year from people threatening to kill me among other things. I passed them on to Norfolk police who said they didn’t fulfil the criteria for death threats.

I'm slightly bemused by this - a death threat that doesn't meet the police's criteria for death threats. I can't help but be reminded of the poor chap who sent a joke tweet about blowing up an airport and received the full penalty of the law.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (33)

Hmmm... I would be interested in the accuracy of this claim:

He has since been reinstated as director of research at the Unit, and the University of East Anglia was found to have breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing some of the hundreds of requests for data they had been sent by sceptics.

Feb 3, 2011 at 4:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterGeckko

Perhaps the police only take notice of threats that are fulfilled...

Feb 3, 2011 at 4:18 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

You have not seen this whine on full blast yet?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitalweathergang/2011/02/cooling_off_the_heated_climate.html

More about the joke twittering later. :)

Feb 3, 2011 at 4:18 PM | Unregistered CommenterShub

Perhaps Plod is fed up with Jones wasting their time after they spent a year investigating allegedly hacked emails and found nothing.

Feb 3, 2011 at 4:22 PM | Unregistered CommenterDavid S

Previous lecture, 22nd October 2010


Drilling for Oil in Lincolnshire by Paul Barrett, MD of Europa Oil

Paul Barrett is a real life Oilman. He is Managing Diector of Europa Oil Ltd., a company that drills for oil in Romania and Lincolnshire. Currently the company is producing oil in the county, not large quantities by North Sea standards but nevertheless what might be terms "nice little earners".
Paul explained in geological terms how oil is formed and collected in reservoirs within rock formations. Lincolnshire's geology was explained so that the audience could understand why oil is to be found in some areas and not in others. The lecture included interesting facts about gas production from very small reservoirs which in theory might be possible in Lincolnshire. However, perhaps the most interesting topic was the production of gas from underground coal seams. This presents the prospect that gas produced in this way could be used where it was produced to generate electricity cleanly. The lecture was followed by a lively and lengthy question and answer session.

It would appear that the SPALDING GENTLEMEN'S SOCIETY is in league with BIG OIL.

Phil Jones should be told.

Feb 3, 2011 at 4:24 PM | Unregistered CommenterMac

Gekko - I seem to recall he made this claim on the Horizon programme, which had me yelling at the telly that if he had responded to the polite rquests for the data there would have been no need for the FOI requests. No mention of the fact that he had lost the data or not filed it.

"He will speak tomorrow about the research work of his unit which, together with the Met Office, is sponsored by DEFRA to monitor temperatures worldwide over land and sea and computer-model changes into the future.

Asked about predictions for the climate of the Fens, he said: “We deal with global average temperatures rather than local ones.

“But our plot for the 2080s shows a range of potential changes for the UK, depending on the emissions scenario.

“In England if a lot is done to offset emissions, temperatures will rise by three degrees. If nothing is done that could be seven or eight degrees.”"

If a lot is done? What £18b a year? Words fail me..............no mention of the statistically insignificant increase in temperatures since 2000 in his wonderful global average temperatures. I could go on but I have a meeting to go to about the more important here and now - mostly cuts to the council budget, cuts to important services like looking after old people. We could do with that money as old people are living longer and need looking after for longer. Remind me how many people have died of the cold in recent years compared with that heat wave in Europe in 2005 and 06? Remind me of fuel poverty?

I don't usually get so angry and I don't like anything to do with death threats or other crass remarks, but sometimes I can understand it. This man is insufferable and is adept at playing the victim. Urgh!

Feb 3, 2011 at 4:39 PM | Unregistered Commenterbiddyb

Phil Jones lecture gives sceptics an opportunity to enlist the good gentlemen of Spalding to direct probing questions.

The big unanswered question is of course;

Did Phil Jones actually delete emails referring to the Wahl-Briffa exchange about IPCC in summer 2006?

This could be the Spalding Gentlemen's Society big moment in the limelight. It would be so wrong to waste the opportunity.

Feb 3, 2011 at 4:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterMac

Contact details for SGS: info@spalding-gentlemens-society.org

Feb 3, 2011 at 4:48 PM | Unregistered CommenterMac

“In England if a lot is done to offset emissions, temperatures will rise by three degrees. If nothing is done that could be seven or eight degrees.”

So we’ll have a nice little microclimate while everyone else is reaching for the salt tablets? Or does he think that our CO2 output is more significant than everyone else’s? I wonder what they put in the coffee at UEA..?

Feb 3, 2011 at 4:49 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

Santer is saying that he is 'concerned'. He says:

"Those [emails] are of concern, particularly when you have loved ones and it's clear that some of these people out there are not very rational."

Funny that, I could say the exact same thing in connection with Santer's Climategate emails and my family as well!

And this, from a guy threatening physical violence, more than once.

"If something were to happen I would hold people like Mr. Morano personally responsible."

I think Mr Morano is safe, as long as he does not go wandering around in dark alleys.

Feb 3, 2011 at 4:51 PM | Unregistered CommenterShub

Yeah the law is messed up. You have to get physically hurt before it's a threat, unless of course you threaten a power broker. It's all about politics. It took me a while to realize this. There is no grand law of right and wrong. There are only man-made rules that get enforced whenever the coffers get low or you piss someone off...or a LEO wants to exert his power.

Even federal laws have quotas. In the State of Massachusetts the US Attorney sets the guidelines for what will be prosecuted. They don't have the resources to prosecute each and every crime. Since banks in the US are ensured by the FDIC (a federal org), bank robberies become federal crimes investigated by the FBI.

The guideline says that a suspect has to steal a minimum of $100,000 before the FBI/US Attorney will prosecute. If you are a bank employee, the guideline says you have to steal a minimum of $50,000. This doesn't mean the bank won't try to prosecute a suspect with their own resources, but the Feds won't bother you if you walk away with $80,000 in Mass. The FBI will put the suspect info in a file and wait until he amasses $100,000. US attorney guidelines are different for every state and crime.

Lastly, in the US the FBI falls under the Executive branch of government. They do the Presidents bidding. Same for any locality.

Feb 3, 2011 at 4:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterKevin

It's very simple. Don't mess with the guys that own the jail. Everyone else is fair game.

Feb 3, 2011 at 5:08 PM | Unregistered Commenterj ferguson

This story is really peculiar. See here and here. Death threats are a criminal offence

115) Threats to kill, contrary to section 16 Offences Against the Person Act 1861. (Archbold 19-124 to 19-129);

116) Threats can be calculated and premeditated, or said in the heat of the moment. The defendant does not have to have the intention to kill but there has to be an intent that the person to whom the threat has been issued would fear it would be carried out. Where it is doubtful whether the threat carried the necessary intent a charge under section 4 Public Order Act 1986 may be appropriate. Refer also to Public Order Offences incorporating the Charging Standard elsewhere in the Legal guidance.

Feb 3, 2011 at 5:39 PM | Unregistered CommenterMaurizio Morabito

Maurizio Morabito

So basically you have to lie to law enforcement. 'Sir, did you fear for your life when you received that email that said, "We kill at 11:00 PM"?' "Uh, yes officer, very afraid."

The law can be interpreted however it needs to be to fit the political trend of the time. A kid was just suspended from school for having a pea-shooter. It was deemed a weapon.

Feb 3, 2011 at 5:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterKevin

Another point just to tie this with Phil Jones and his use of the sympathy card. At one time I visited an atheist web site message board that was run by a bunch of vitriolic schoolboys. They did not take kindly to criticism of their views. I didn't have a problem with their main goal, I had issues with their methods.

Anyway, some one or some group hacked them and they called the FBI. They then sent out emails saying 'Better watch out, we contacted the FBI and they are looking into this'. I had a good laugh. The FBI only took their info and filed it in their complaint file which happens to be their biggest case file. These guys weren't even a non-profit. They were nothing. There was no money lost. There was nothing to quantify. The FBI could care less. They have bigger fish to fry.

This Phil Jones sympathy propaganda effort reminded me of that episode. It seems his reputation is tarnished and he is attempting to publicize even bad press to gain sympathy. Sad.

Feb 3, 2011 at 6:01 PM | Unregistered CommenterKevin

Maybe the practice of sending hate messages is much more common than we realize. I see that even a constestant from the "Come Dine With Me" program has been flooded with them just for being rude.

http://www.lemondrop.co.uk/2011/01/28/come-dine-with-me-contestant-marcello-marino-receives-death-thr/

However unlike Phil Jones there is no political capital to be made out of that.

Feb 3, 2011 at 6:15 PM | Unregistered CommenterFrankSW

Spalding Gentlemen's Society = http://www.spalding-gentlemens-society.org/

"Founded in 1710, the Society boasts a long and interesting history. Our collections are incredibly varied - you can find anything from a hatpin to a range of firearms and cameras, beautiful glassware, an amazing selection of coins, medals and stamps, silverware and tableware - and an amazing library.

The Society also arranges an important series of professional lectures on a wide range subjects, which are open to the public. For further details, please follow the link."

I once gave a lecture at the Lions Club in Wellington NZ. How fallen are the mighty.

Feb 3, 2011 at 7:03 PM | Unregistered CommenterJeff Norman

Clearly, the threats of Mr Joneses death have been greatly exaggerated.

Feb 3, 2011 at 7:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterPeter S

Every time Jones is interviewed on the (unspeakable) BBC he has the pained expression of someone who has been wronged, misunderstood, attacked without reason etc etc.

And he always gets a very respectful and sympathetic hearing as if it's the least they can do for him.

Feb 3, 2011 at 7:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterDougS

I am staggered that his default, do nothing scenario has the UK temperature (scientifically proven isolated microclimate?) increasing at one degree every decade. I thought 6 degrees was the extreme meltdown scenario for that timeframe.

Will there be a Q&A session after the lecture I wonder?

Sadly I will be driving past Spalding on my way to Leeds tomorrow evening and I don't think the family would support me stopping off.

Feb 3, 2011 at 8:51 PM | Unregistered CommenterArgusfreak

So he lied about the death threats. What a surprise!

He clearly lied about "contemplating suicide"

what an utter A***hole.

Feb 3, 2011 at 9:01 PM | Unregistered CommenterMark Cooper

Spalding is in the heart of an agricultural area. If some of the "gentlemen" thereabouts are farmers or connected with agriculture maybe we can expect a little tough-mindedness towards the climate alarmists. Hope so.

Feb 3, 2011 at 9:13 PM | Unregistered Commentermarchesarosa

Sorry to bore...but how does he get to his one degree per decade increase?

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=48574

From the 70's to the latest data the increase is around half of one degree. The trend is steady and actually flattens in the last decade. So an increase of a bit over 0.1 degree per decade.

Why is the trend now going to accelerate at such a rate?

Bear in mind the acceleration was supposed to start years ago but evidence is lacking in the NASA data for the last decade. What triggers it now? How certain is that? If the steady temperature over the last decade was not foreseen why could a further ten years of flat temperature not occur? Or twenty years?

Feb 3, 2011 at 9:19 PM | Unregistered CommenterArgusfreak

Mike Hulme, colleague of Phil Jones at UEA, doesn't seem to agree that the UK will warm if CO2 increases. In the THES today he writes:

Getting to the nitty-gritty

3 February 2011

Isn't it rather ironic that Newman University College in Birmingham used financial savings from carbon reduction schemes to purchase a new gritter to keep the campus open during snowy weather ("Get a grip", Campus round-up, 27 January)?

The long and convoluted causal chains of climate change surely suggest that carbon reduction schemes should reduce the chances of snowy weather and thus make gritter lorries less necessary. Or maybe something else is going on here. Oh, the complex logics of climate change.

Mike Hulme, Professor of climate change, University of East Anglia

Magnificent use of the double (or triple?) negative!

Feb 3, 2011 at 9:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterDR

LOL

Any prizes for knowing who defended Paul Chambers at his appeal over the twitter joke case? Hint: Andrew Montford had a little run in with him recently :-)

I'm aware of death threats against sceptics as well, but apparently that isn't worth reporting. Phil Jones would probably find it strangely cheering, I would imagine.

Feb 3, 2011 at 11:20 PM | Unregistered CommenterSpence

Re Mark Cooper

So he lied about the death threats. What a surprise!

He clearly lied about "contemplating suicide"

Like much of climate science, there's insufficient evidence to state that, so go easy. There is plenty of evidence for kooks on the net, ie James Lee who threatened to blow up the Discovery channel because they weren't taking global warming seriously, or saving the squirrels. We don't know what the threats were, we only know some of the examples, ie the WaPo example-

For example, reader ***** wrote in to say, "Trenberth is a bad guy. No one should be surprised by anything that this consummate liar does or says. He keeps digging the hole deeper and deeper. He will be buried when it all collapses. I look forward to that day."

Is that a 'death threat'? Or is Santer's suggestion of taking auditors down dark alleys a more serious threat. Either way, threats add little to the debate, but people on the net think they can make threats anonymously and they're wrong. I suspect people like our host, or Watts, or McIntyre get similar threats or hate mail but make less of an issue about it, although more extreme threats are probably worth reporting. Cut them with Occam's razor or sharp tongues, but violence rarely solves anything.

Feb 3, 2011 at 11:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterAtomic Hairdryer

I'd never heard of the Spalding Gentlemen’s Society before. It can really boast impressive names amongst its past members, including Sir Isaac Newton, Lord Tennyson, Alexander Pope and many more. What amused me however was the following

'Only politics and religion are barred from discussion under the founder's ruling.'

Thats two strikes and out then.

Feb 4, 2011 at 12:02 AM | Unregistered CommenterPharos

Re Atomic Hairdryer


Re Mark Cooper

So he lied about the death threats. What a surprise!
He clearly lied about "contemplating suicide"

Like much of climate science, there's insufficient evidence to state that, so go easy. There is plenty of evidence for kooks on the net, ie James Lee who threatened to blow up the Discovery channel because they weren't taking global warming seriously, or saving the squirrels. We don't know what the threats were, we only know some of the examples, ie the WaPo example-

For example, reader ***** wrote in to say, "Trenberth is a bad guy. No one should be surprised by anything that this consummate liar does or says. He keeps digging the hole deeper and deeper. He will be buried when it all collapses. I look forward to that day."
Is that a 'death threat'? Or is Santer's suggestion of taking auditors down dark alleys a more serious threat. Either way, threats add little to the debate, but people on the net think they can make threats anonymously and they're wrong. I suspect people like our host, or Watts, or McIntyre get similar threats or hate mail but make less of an issue about it, although more extreme threats are probably worth reporting. Cut them with Occam's razor or sharp tongues, but violence rarely solves anything.

---------------------
I know it is bad form to feed a troll, but...

I stated that Jones lied about his so called 'death threats'- now he admits this is the case.

Norfolk, Kings Lynn police confirmed to me over the telephone in October 2010 that the death threats claimed by Jones were completely unfounded and were not being investigated.

Jones and other climate liars used this to somehow justify their disgraceful dishonesty when they got found out during climategate. It turns out, there were no real death threats yet the MSM such as the BBC continue to report this as fact even after they were informed that it was not true. Now even jones admits there were no death threats, will teh BBC issue a correction? NO.

Do you really think this is a death threat?
"Trenberth is a bad guy. No one should be surprised by anything that this consummate liar does or says. He keeps digging the hole deeper and deeper. He will be buried when it all collapses. I look forward to that day."

No adult could seriously consider that comment as a death threat.

Feb 4, 2011 at 12:32 AM | Unregistered CommenterMark Cooper

Re Mark Cooper

I stated that Jones lied about his so called 'death threats'- now he admits this is the case.

AFAIK we still don't know this given the threat emails haven't been released. Regardless it's a perception thing vs a police duty to investigate threats. We know NDET were called in to investigate and NDET's role has been to investigate extremists, including animal rights extremists who have threatened and caused some pretty serious harm to scientists by sending parcel bombs and the like. Jones would probably have been aware of this and felt threatened.

He may have felt suicidal due to problems with his work being exposed and being a central figure in the debate. But he seemed to enjoy the 'fame' while it lasted. One of the more shameful aspects of Climategate is the way the UEA seems to have failed in its duty of care to protect Jones as he became more famous. They were perhaps more interested in the kudos and funding CRU's fame attracted rather than ensuring the science and processes followed by CRU were robust.

The focus still needs to be on the science. not the personalities or it provides easy ammunition to our opponents who say we're attacking the scientists. Crude ad hom attacks are what our opponents do. We need to beat them with logic, reason and evidence not insults or threats.

Feb 4, 2011 at 12:51 AM | Unregistered CommenterAtomic Hairdryer

To: Atomic Hairdryer

you quoted me as follows:
So he lied about the death threats. What a surprise!
He clearly lied about "contemplating suicide"

I replied to your post, focusing on the first line of the quote and ignored the second line.

to clarify on that: no-one at CRU, his colleagues, Medical Doctors or family has commented on his claim that he contemplated suicide. Did he ask for counselling, were hospitals or psychiatrists involved? NO.

If he had nothing to be ashamed of, why would he think about suicide?

Having said all that, If I was Dr Jones, waiting to be exposed as a total charlatan and a liar-knowing that eventually I was going to be found out, I would be feeling very depressed about my future.

I personally would hope that his friends and family would council him to come clean and admit he had been dishonest and get it over within the public eye, rather than just killing himself.

Feb 4, 2011 at 12:53 AM | Unregistered CommenterMark Cooper

Yes, Spence, I am keeping mum (for a bit) on that. ;)

Feb 4, 2011 at 1:58 AM | Unregistered CommenterShub

Gosh, could it really be the case that the distinguished Professor Jones exaggerated the email threats that he received? Surely not.

Feb 4, 2011 at 8:57 AM | Unregistered CommenterPaulM

We have sufficient evidence to form a working hypothesis that much of what Phil Jones is says exaggerated.

Feb 4, 2011 at 10:45 AM | Unregistered CommenterAngusPangus

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>