Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia – Leaked documents and emails

[birdie1971]

From their website:

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/about/

“The Climate Research Unit (CRU) is widely recognised as one of the world's leading institutions concerned with the study of natural and anthropogenic climate change.”


The CRU has recently been hacked (20 November 2009) and hundreds of emails and documents have been published on the internet.

What these emails have shown is that several of the 'top' climate scientists have been actively conspiring to destroy data that disproves anthropogenic global warming (AGW), and openly discussing ways in which scientists who don't believe AGW is real should be 'blocked' from publishing their findings in peer reviewed scientific journals.

http://www.timesonlin...nt/article6936328.ece

[birdie1971]

Jake -

You are quite astonishingly obtuse sometimes. One of the premier climate research institutes has been found to be falsifying data, deliberately destroying data and actively trying to suppress both freedom of information requests and block descenting scientists from having their papers published.

And you don't think any of that is important?

Your say, “They have hacked in and taken a bunch of E-mails and displayed them out of context.”

Out of context?

How about this one...


“On Oct 14, 2009, at 10:17 AM, Kevin Trenberth wrote:

Hi Tom
How come you do not agree with a statement that says we are no where close to knowing where energy is going or whether clouds are changing to make the planet brighter. We are not close to balancing the energy budget. The fact that we can not account for what is happening in the climate system makes any consideration of geoengineering quite hopeless as we will never be able to tell if it is successful or not! It is a travesty!
Kevin”

[birdie1971]

Continued...


What the above quote does is invalidate all the computer models as they clearly cannot 'balance the energy budget', ie. The equations MUST be equal on either side – net energy in must equal net energy out. If they can't do that, then predictions about warming, cooling, sea level rise, etc. are all rendered invalid.

But according to you, the quote is out of context.

Just what would put the above quote IN context Jake?

[birdie1971]

As usual, the Global Warming nutters will have us believe that imminent climate disaster looms – just like it did in the 1970s when we were all going to be wiped out by Global Cooling.

Global Warming is simply not happening.

What we're seeing is normal variation in climate which is exactly what you'd expect after coming out of a major Ice Age just 15,000 years ago.

[BillyBB]

Phew handbags at dawn


The files appear to have been on a publically accessable FTP server rather than behind any firewall so not so much hacked as leaked.
Not just emails but notes from programmers and bits of code have now been examined, for a compilation see here - http://bishophill.squ...9/11/23/the-code.html some of it is dynamite. Whatever data you put in you get a hockey stick out etc etc

Re Royal Society pieces the major author appears to be John Houghton FRS, former chair of Working Group I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Some of the signaturies are the very people implicated by the released emails.

The climate will continue to change long after humans have gone. Another 100,000 years and Earth will be covered by ice again. The species alive now are not much changed from the last ice age and all lived through the Medieval Warm Period too. Any extra extinctions will be down to the pressure of having 5 billion humans taking up room and resources. We should conserve energy and reduce pollution but forget carbon taxes.

[birdie1971]

Not surprising to see that the BBC has now gone all out to play down the impact of these emails while simultaneously trying to 'big up' the Global Warming argument.

It's actually quite pathetic to watch an organisation such as the BBC attempt to discredit one of the most important stories in recent years with yet more pseudo-scientific claptrap such as their recent “An animated journey through the Earth's climate history” video.

Yet again, the falsehood that says, 'CO2 causes temperatures to rise' is simply accepted as a fact and consequently all other conclusions are based on this premise. In science, if you base your conclusions on a false premise, your results are going to be wildly inaccurate.


CO2 does NOT cause temperatures to rise. Increasing temperatures cause an increase in CO2. Temperature drives CO2. CO2 does NOT force temperature rise. Temperature rise occurs through some other mechanism – most likely, solar radiation. And solar physicists around the world are predicting a global cooling and have been for some time.

Human contribution to CO2 levels in the atmosphere is minuscule in the grand scheme of things. If we are affecting climate, then it is to such a small extent that anything we do to try and reduce our 'carbon footprint' is meaningless.

I'm all for minimising our impact on the natural environment. In fact, I'm a bit of a tree hugger. But the argument that humans are causing potentially catastrophic climate change is risible.