Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Climategate: the final nail in the coffin of 'Anthropogenic Global Warming'?

Recommended Posts

If you own any shares in alternative energy companies I should start dumping them NOW. The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth (aka AGW; aka ManBearPig) has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka Hadley CRU) and released 61 megabites of confidential files onto the internet. (Hat tip: Watts Up With That)

When you read some of those files – including 1079 emails and 72 documents – you realise just why the boffins at Hadley CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be “the greatest in modern science”. These alleged emails – supposedly exchanged by some of the most prominent scientists pushing AGW theory – suggest:

Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organised resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.

One of the alleged emails has a gentle gloat over the death in 2004 of John L Daly (one of the first climate change sceptics, founder of the Still Waiting For Greenhouse site), commenting:

“In an odd way this is cheering news.”

But perhaps the most damaging revelations – the scientific equivalent of the Telegraph’s MPs’ expenses scandal – are those concerning the way Warmist scientists may variously have manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause.

Here are a few tasters. (So far, we can only refer to them as alleged emails because – though Hadley CRU’s director Phil Jones has confirmed the break-in to Ian Wishart at the Briefing Room – he has yet to fess up to any specific contents.) But if genuine, they suggest dubious practices such as:

Manipulation of evidence:

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.

Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:

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.

Suppression of evidence:

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?

Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.

Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.

We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists:


time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat

the crap out of him. Very tempted.

Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):

……Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back–I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that it would be nice to try to “contain” the putative “MWP”, even if we don’t yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back….

And, perhaps most reprehensibly, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority.

“This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?”

“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.”“It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I’ve had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !”

Hadley CRU has form in this regard. In September – I wrote the story up here as “How the global warming industry is based on a massive lie” – Hadley CRU’s researchers were exposed as having “cherry-picked” data in order to support their untrue claim that global temperatures had risen higher at the end of the 20th century than at any time in the last millenium. Hadley CRU was also the organisation which – in contravention of all acceptable behaviour in the international scientific community – spent years withholding data from researchers it deemed unhelpful to its cause. This matters because Hadley CRU, established in 1990 by the Met Office, is a government-funded body which is supposed to be a model of rectitude. Its HadCrut record is one of the four official sources of global temperature data used by the IPCC.

I asked in my title whether this will be the final nail in the coffin of Anthropenic Global Warming. This was wishful thinking, of course. In the run up to Copenhagen, we will see more and more hysterical (and grotesquely exaggerated) stories such as this in the Mainstream Media. And we will see ever-more-virulent campaigns conducted by eco-fascist activists, such as this risible new advertising campaign by Plane Stupid showing CGI polar bears falling from the sky and exploding because kind of, like, man, that’s sort of what happens whenever you take another trip on an aeroplane.

The world is currently cooling; electorates are increasingly reluctant to support eco-policies leading to more oppressive regulation, higher taxes and higher utility bills; the tide is turning against Al Gore’s Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. The so-called “sceptical” view is now also the majority view.

Unfortunately, we’ve a long, long way to go before the public mood (and scientific truth) is reflected by our policy makers. There are too many vested interests in AGW, with far too much to lose either in terms of reputation or money, for this to end without a bitter fight.

But if the Hadley CRU scandal is true,it’s a blow to the AGW lobby’s credibility which is never likely to recover.






Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
Haha...has this been independently confirmed yet?



Haven't been digging yet. Working on getting this snobby rich kid to give me his "broken" ipod touch.....stuck in recovery mode...

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites



I have never denied the fact that climate change exists. I definitely questioned the science and the way the data was presented, and why anyone who questioned it was written off as a crank...not to mention the fact that carbon offsets were obviously just another way to squeeze more money out of people for products and services they didn't need.


I should also add that I reuse and recycle, do community gardening, and have volunteered my time doing creek rehabilitation and cleanup in Berkeley. So it's not like I don't give a shit about the planet.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't really looked at the article yet so I can't comment on it. Dude who wrote the article sounds like a douche though: "James Delingpole is a writer, journalist and broadcaster who is right about everything. He is the author of numerous fantastically entertaining books including Welcome To Obamaland: I've Seen Your Future And It Doesn't Work, How To Be Right, and the Coward series of WWII adventure novels." Casek do you follow writers like this or do they just happen to be the ones you find that support your opinions when you do internet searches?


Doesn't make me want to read it but I'll take a look later. Also I've never heard of the University of East Anglia.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm certainly not surprised that figures got manipulated to show what they wanted them to show, it is something that I imagine is pretty common when people are trying to make a point no matter what the evidence suggests to them.


Personally I think that governments need to take the focus away from global warming and focus more on renewable energy sources because that is where the problem lies, we need to put more money into developing useable sources to replace our need on carbon based fuels.


I receycle etc but to be honest I don't really give much thought to the environment, but then compared to most I probably have a small carbon footprint, I don't drive I recycle and when buying white goods I look for best energy ratings etc, but that is purely selfish I just wanna have lower energy bills!!!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Haven't really looked at the article yet so I can't comment on it. Dude who wrote the article sounds like a douche though: "James Delingpole is a writer, journalist and broadcaster who is right about everything. He is the author of numerous fantastically entertaining books including Welcome To Obamaland: I've Seen Your Future And It Doesn't Work, How To Be Right, and the Coward series of WWII adventure novels." Casek do you follow writers like this or do they just happen to be the ones you find that support your opinions when you do internet searches?


Doesn't make me want to read it but I'll take a look later. Also I've never heard of the University of East Anglia.



The important thing is the emails, not the writer of the article.




The University of East Anglia (UEA) is a public research university in Norwich, England.[9] It was established in 1963, and is a founder-member of the 1994 Group of research-intensive universities.[10] The University was ranked 20th in the The Times Good University Guide 2008,[11] and joint first for student satisfaction among mainstream universities in the 2006 National Student Survey.[12] The University was also ranked 57th in Europe, and one of the top 200 universities in the world, in the 2007 Academic Ranking of World Universities published by Shanghai Jiao Tong University.[13]

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who leaked the Hadley CRU files and why



The anonymous tipster, whom many people initially assumed had "hacked" into the computers at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia (repeatedly called the "Hadley CRU," by mistake), might in fact be a CRU insider who released the files for his own reasons.


The user, known only as "FOIA" (which now appears to be a reference to the British equivalent of the US Freedom of Information Act), left only one comment on The Air Vent to announce his release of his 61-MB ZIP archive. He has never been heard from since, nor has anyone stepped forward claiming to be that person since the story became widely known.


Persons knowledgeable in information security hold that this is not the behavior of a hacker. A hacker normally boasts of his act, even if he were hired or otherwise suborned to commit his act by someone else. These two reports provide illustrations of such behavior.


Other commenters have observed that the very form and organization of the archive, which expands to 168 MB of text files, word-processing documents, PDF files, raw data, and even program code, indicate that someone already having access to the system logged in through his usual channels, made the archive, and then logged out. The user's choice of words indicate someone having a motive to disclose to the world certain activities and mindsets that the user found distasteful, at least.


This Examiner has been able to reconstruct a timeline of the story, from the initial attempt by the user to publish his material to another site, to the events of yesterday morning. However, before presenting this timeline, this Examiner is obliged to issue a correction: the phrase "Hadley CRU" is not the true name of the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia. The first person to use that phrase was Anthony Watts, of Watts Up With That. As RealClimate.org and others have noted, Watts is the first person to use the phrase "Hadley Centre" to describe the CRU. This is incorrect; the CRU does not use the word "Hadley" in its name, and the "Hadley Centre" is an entirely separate institution, having no connection with Phil Jones or his team beyond, perhaps, being in sympathy with Jones' stated theories and goals. That Watts was initially confused becomes evident when the photograph of the Hadley Centre headquarters, published on the Centre's own web site, is compared with the photograph that Watts initially ran with his own comment. Watts has since replaced that photograph with one of the actual CRU building.


The timeline begins on November 17, when the user named "FOIA" left this comment at The Air Vent site:


We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps.


We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents. Hopefully it will give some insight into the science and the people behind it.


This is a limited time offer, download now:


He then continued with a link to a Russian anonymous FTP account. (That account no longer works, but this Examiner was able to obtain the archive from it when a correspondent alerted him to it.)


This is consistent with Phil Jones' statement to Ian Wishart of Investigate magazine, dated November 20. Jones said that he had known about a security breach of his organizations computers "three or four days ago," having heard about the matter first from the administrators of RealClimate.org. Concerning RealClimate's immediate reaction, Jones said:


Real Climate were given information, but took it down off their site and told me they would send it across to me. They didn’t do that. I only found out it had been released five minutes ago.


RealClimate's own statement says this:


We were made aware of the existence of this archive last Tuesday morning when the hackers attempted to upload it to RealClimate, and we notified CRU of their possible security breach later that day.


This indicates that the tipster first tried to submit his material to RealClimate.org, and when the administrators refused to accept it, he then established his Russian anonymous FTP account and submitted the link in his comment to The Air Vent.


The Air Vent's administrator, Jeff Id, was out-of-contact when the comment was posted. No one said another word about it until, two days later, the user named Steven Mosher alerted The Blackboard. Initially he left only a link to the original post, not a specific comment link. But apparently Lucia, the Blackboard administrator, followed the link and examined the files for herself. She was, however, reluctant to publish the link, but another user, Jean S, published it for her. In the process, she said this:


Seems to me that someone has hacked UAH computers. All e-mails seem to contain at least an addrees ending uea.ac.uk. Also all the files seem to be UAH-related. At least some of the material has to be real, there are just so many small details that were just impossible to fake (for instance under briffa-treering-external/timonen there are some file names only a Finn would use).


She might be referring to file names like "kilpisj" and "hossapal", and extensions like "tuc". The file names fail to translate when subjected to Google's Translate routines.


At the same time, Steven Mosher published an alert to Climate Audit. Then within hours, Anthony Watts at Watts Up With That published his own brief commentary. Shortly after that, this Examiner made his initial report, which is, as far as this Examiner has been able to determine, the first report by a professional or semi-professional journalist of this whole affair. Ian Wishart, editor and publisher of Investigate, also took note of the story at the same time and published his own initial blog entry, in which he announced that he had sent an e-mail to Phil Jones requesting an interview.


In all that time, the original poster of the Russian FTP link never made another comment in any forum. As discussed above, this is not typical of a hacker. A hacker would be boasting about his act, and loudly. Instead, his file sat in that anonymous FTP account for more than forty-eight hours, and the poster never made any further attempt to publicize his find. Hence the conclusion, by this Examiner and a host of other commenters, including IP security professionals, that this unknown user was one who had had access to CRU computers, in accordance with his duties at the CRU.


Mr. Stephen McIntyre at Climate Audit has made no secret of his repeated attempts to demand, under Britain's Freedom of Information Act, that Phil Jones and his team yield up the data that are the basis of their claims for anthropogenic global warming (AGW) and its effects. Preliminary analysis of the archived e-mails also indicates that Jones knew of McIntyre's efforts and was taking steps to stall and thwart them, in violation of the law. Perhaps, then, someone at CRU decided to take the law into his own hands.


A request-for-comment to Mr. McIntyre from this Examiner is now pending. Climate Audit is back on-line, though it appears to be slow to load.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

gawd, the way i see it, this is only going to be used to debunk and discredit pretty much all efforts at creating a "sustainable future", which i personally feel is the real point of any green movement type shit.


who cares if the planet isn't warming by 2 degrees that will cause horrible things to happen!!


the real issue is the fact that polluting the earth in general just isn't a good thing to do, in conjunction with the fact that fossil fuels just aren't gonna cut it, and more importantly, that there are millions of starving people who live (die) in poverty pretty much at the expense of our awesome all consuming culture/lifestyle.


fuck climate change, global warming blah blah blah, how about people change, cause as of now, we are being led by fucking psychotic-severely misguided people chasing that dollar.

end rant

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that people should change their habits, but the carbon cap industry is a scam that takes attention away from real solutions (building better transit, alternative fuels, etc.) which would actually do more to reduce CO2 over the long term.


To me, it's like saying is that people can maintain their current lifestyles...at a premium. If they don't like that, they can buy new products...that cost more. Either way, it's not a very good deal and it's more dollar-chasing engineered by the people in charge.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

The more and more that comes out, the more fucked it is. Communiques between top climatologists working for the UN on how to suppress the real numbers, how to make sure

papers with opposing views aren't published, etc.


Sounds criminal.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites



A very interesting look into this whole craze.


I posted another speech he gave to Congress on global warming which could easily be found on his website.


Please read it. I guarantee you will have a new out look on global warming, and probably a lot of other things in general.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy shit... whos still buying into these concepts of man made global warming? With all the massive daily developments that discredit the IPCC, Al Gore, the UN and the rest of the lot!

Death to the Copenhagen Treaty!

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes. i saw this last night on the news. but the reporter never mentioned this leak.


they basically said on FoxNews (i only get channel 4 in my apartment, i'm poor and slightly stupid) that they "lost the data", not somebody hacked it to expose these criminal bastards.


this is just another piece of the puzzle. this global warming crisis would have put new taxes on petroleum usage, and making another group of liars rich beyond their wildest dreams.... it's all a farce.


if i couldn't get high, i don't know what the fuck i'd do. revolution, that's what.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...