ClimateGate 2.0 - 5000 new emails released by whistleblower; 200000 still encrypted

Watts Up With That, University of East Anglie Climate Research Unit ^ | 23 Nov 2011 | Anthony Watts, JeffID

[Robert A Cook PE]

Early this morning, history repeated itself. FOIA.org has produced an enormous zip file of 5,000 additional emails similar to those released two years ago in November 2009 and coined Climategate. There are almost 1/4 million additional emails locked behind a password, which the organization does not plan on releasing at this time.

The original link was dropped off in the Hurricane Kenneth thread at about 4 AM Eastern. It is still there.

Some initial snippets floating around the blogosphere:

<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”.

<3115> Mann: By the way, when is Tom C going to formally publish his roughly 1500 year reconstruction??? It would help the cause to be able to refer to that reconstruction as confirming Mann and Jones, etc.

<3940> Mann: They will (see below) allow us to provide some discussion of the synthetic example, referring to the J. Cimate paper (which should be finally accepted upon submission of the revised final draft), so that should help the cause a bit.

<0810> Mann: I gave up on Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she think’s she’s doing, but its not helping the cause

<2440> Jones: I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process

<2094> Briffa: UEA does not hold the very vast majority of mine [potentially FOIable emails] anyway which I copied onto private storage after the completion of the IPCC task.

JeffId has some initial reaction

From the ReadMe file:

/// FOIA 2011 — Background and Context ///

“Over 2.5 billion people live on less than $2 a day.”

“Every day nearly 16.000 children die from hunger and related causes.”

“One dollar can save a life” — the opposite must also be true.

“Poverty is a death sentence.”

“Nations must invest $37 trillion in energy technologies by 2030 to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions at sustainable levels.”

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 such as…

[Robert A Cook PE]

The almost quarter million additional encrypted emails are thought to be "searched" during the original FOIA automated search routines, but which not meet the "trigger" of the search function for ID of the sender, content, or title ...

The "New" 5000 emails are relevant to the continuing coverup and hiding of original (tax-payer-funded) climate research, and the continuing efforts of those politicians and university priests (er, academic elites and their funding sources) to coverup problems - if those problems are likely to interrupt university funding.

And yes, Penn State covered up Mann's failures of research and interference with academic publishing to make sure he kept getting money for Penn State, just as Penn State covered up the football crimes to make sure they kept getting football money.

[Stalwart]

As for the remaining encrypted part, my bet is on one or both of those age-old motivators: Sex and money.

[factoryrat]

Why would info on climate research be encrypted? That makes absolutely no sense. Weather data is available to anyone who has a desire to look at it.

[steelyourfaith]

 

For more selections, go to the original batch of selections posted here.  http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2011/11/22/climategate-2-0/

The original files (173 MB) of all the e-mails released here: http://globalwarming.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/FOIA2011.zip      


<1939> Thorne/MetO:
Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. Phil, hopefully we can find time to discuss these further if necessary [...]  

<3066> Thorne:
I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.  

<2884> Wigley:
Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive [...] there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC [...]  

<4755> Overpeck:
The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guid[e] what’s included and what is left out.  

<0170> Jones:
Kevin, Seems that this potential Nature paper may be worth citing, if it does say that GW is having an effect on TC [tropical cyclone] activity.  

<4716> Adams:
Somehow we have to leave the[m] thinking OK, climate change is extremely complicated, BUT I accept the dominant view that people are affecting it, and that impacts produces risk that needs careful and urgent attention.  

<1790> Lorenzoni:
I agree with the importance of extreme events as foci for public and governmental opinion [...] ‘climate change’ needs to be present in people’s daily lives. They should be reminded that it is a continuously occurring and evolving phenomenon  

<3062> Jones:
We don’t really want the bullshit and optimistic stuff that Michael has written [...] We’ll have to cut out some of his stuff.  

<1485> Mann:
the important thing is to make sure they’re loosing the PR battle. That’s what the site [Real Climate] is about.  

<2428> Ashton/co2.org:
Having established scale and urgency, the political challenge is then to turn this from an argument about the cost of cutting emissions – bad politics – to one about the value of a stable climate – much better politics. [...] the most valuable thing to do is to tell the story about abrupt change as vividly as possible  

<4141> Minns/Tyndall Centre:
In my experience, global warming freezing is already a bit of a public relations problem with the media  

<5111> Pollack:
But it will be very difficult to make the MWP [medieval warm period] go away in Greenland.  

<1682> Wils:
[2007] What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us probably [...]  

<5315> Jenkins/MetO:
would you agree that there is no convincing evidence for kilimanjaro glacier melt being due to recent warming (let alone man-made warming)?  

<2292> Jones:
[tropical glaciers] There is a small problem though with their retreat. They have retreated a lot in the last 20 years yet the MSU2LT data would suggest that temperatures haven’t increased at these levels.  

<4693> Crowley:
I am not convinced that the “truth” is always worth reaching if it is at the cost of damaged personal relationships  

<2733> Crowley:
Phil, thanks for your thoughts – guarantee there will be no dirty laundry in the open.  

<0953> Jones:
This will reduce the 1940-1970 cooling in NH [northern hemisphere] temps. Explaining the cooling with sulphates won’t be quite as necessary.  

<4944> Haimberger:
It is interesting to see the lower tropospheric warming minimum in the tropics in all three plots, which I cannot explain. I believe it is spurious but it is remarkably robust against my adjustment efforts.  

<4938> Jenkins/MetO:
By coincidence I also got recently a paper from Rob which says “London’s UHI [urban heat island effect] has indeed become more intense since the 1960s esp during spring and summer”.  

<4789> Wigley:
there are some nitpicky jerks who have criticized the Jones et al. data sets – we don’t want one of those [EPRI/California Energy Commission meeting].
Jones: The jerk you mention was called Good(e)rich who found urban warming at all Californian sites.  

<4165> Jones:
what he [Zwiers] has done comes to a different conclusion than Caspar and Gene! I reckon this can be saved by careful wording.  

<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”.  

<4758> Osborn:
Because how can we be critical of Crowley for throwing out 40-years in the middle of his calibration, when we’re throwing out all post-1960 data ‘cos the MXD [maximum latewood density] has a non temperature signal in it, and also all pre-1881 or pre-1871 data ‘cos the temperature data may have a non-temperature signal in it!  

<4369> Cook:
I am afraid that Mike is defending something that increasingly can not be defended. He is investing too much personal stuff in this and not letting the science move ahead.  

<2132> Wigley:
I heard that Zichichi has links with the Vatican. A number of other greenhouse skeptics have extreme religious views.  

<4394> Houghton [MetO, IPCC co-chair]: [...] we dont take seriously enough our God-given responsibility to care for the Earth [...] 500 million people are expected to watch The Day After Tomorrow. We must pray that they pick up that message.  

<5131> Shukla/IGES:
["Future of the IPCC", 2008] It is inconceivable that policymakers will be willing to make billion-and trillion-dollar decisions for adaptation to the projected regional climate change based on models that do not even describe and simulate the processes that are the building blocks of climate variability.  

<0850> Barnett:
[IPCC AR5 models] clearly, some tuning or very good luck involved.  I doubt the modeling world will be able to get away with this much longer  

<5066> Hegerl:
[IPCC AR5 models] So using the 20th c for tuning is just doing what some people have long suspected us of doing [...] and what the nonpublished diagram from NCAR showing correlation between aerosol forcing and sensitivity also suggested.  

<4443> Jones:
Basic problem is that all models are wrong – not got enough middle and low level clouds.  

<3594> Berger:
Phil, Many thanks for your paper and congratulations for reviving the global warming.  

<4184> Jones:
[to Hansen] Keep up the good work! [...] Even though it’s been a mild winter in the UK, much of the rest of the world seems coolish – expected though given the La Nina. Roll on the next El Nino!  

<2440> Jones:
I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process  

<1577> Jones:
[FOI, temperature data] Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden. I’ve discussed this with the main funder (US Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.  

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[stboz]

I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.

No kidding. These clowns should be in jail.

[Noumenon]

These clowns should be in jail.

Stripped naked, tarred and feathered, and driven into the wilderness would do the trick.

[PATRIOT1876]

*> 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”. *

I wonder if Mann allows his kids to say the word “Hell” but forbids them to say H-E double hockey sticks?......
All the evidence and science shows that the AGW scam is a complete hoax. Even if it was true, the cure is so dismal and destructive, it would make us long for the Middle Ages.

I'm glad to see that it is confirmed as a scam over and over and over again!!!

[PATRIOT1876]

*These clowns should be in jail.
Stripped naked, tarred and feathered, and driven into the wilderness would do the trick. *

Perhaps the death penalty for Al Gore.
I am. Not. Joking.

The potential (likely) destruction of the economies of the world and the loss of freedom just so that he could make a profit is tremendously disgusting. The number of lives ruined and even lost if this were to be taken more seriously and made into even more laws would be astronomical.

It would pave the way for totalitarian dictatorships all over the globe, because everything you do causes carbon. The death toll would go far beyond the 100 million or so killed in the last century under Communism because governments would control every bit of your life.

[stboz]

bttt

[ImNotLying]

Al Gore.....paging Algore.....has anyone seen Algore. He committed what? Oh Chit.....we’re all going to jail....quick dump these computers in the North Sea....what? It’s frozen over?

[Texas Fossil]

cc: "Michael E. Mann" mann@multiproxy.evsc.virginia.edu, Malcolm Hughes

mhughes@ltrr.arizona.edu, esper@wsl.ch, k.briffa@uea.ac.uk, t.osborn@uea.ac.uk, p.jones@uea.ac.uk, tcrowley@duke.edu, rbradley@geo.umass.edu, jto@u.arizona.edu, srutherford@virginia.edu

date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:54:56 -0400

from: Tom Crowley

subject: peace

to: Ed Cook

Dear friends,

I am concerned about the the stressed tone of some of the words being circulated lately. Such difficulties not only hamper collegiality (which I value greatly) but also the actual progress in our field.

I think you are all fine fellows and very good scientists and that it is time to smoke the peace pipe on all this and put a temporary moratorium on more email messages until tempers cool down a bit. After this maybe we can discuss things somewhere where each party comes to the meeting beforehand with a commitment to even-handed discussion and give and take.

I hope I have not offended anyone in this message -- it is of course a personal opinion. Maybe it is an illusion or prejudice on my part, but somehow I am not convinced that the "truth" is always worth reaching if it is at the cost of damaged personal relationships....

Best wishes, Tom

[justa-hairyape]

Maybe it is an illusion or prejudice on my part, but somehow I am not convinced that the "truth" is always worth reaching if it is at the cost of damaged personal relationships....

Should be the new Penn State motto. Also looks like we are dealing with an Academic Mafia.

[justa-hairyape]

Why would info on climate research be encrypted? That makes absolutely no sense.

Within the recent release of hacked emails (Climate Gate II) there is a large encrypted file that apparently contains all of the rest of the emails. Or perhaps a larger subset of emails that have not been key word searched. The hacker apparently released that additional data with an impossible to break cipher. You need the passcode to unencrypt these files. So at some point in the future, that passcode could be released and those additional emails can be read.

There has been some speculation as to why this would be done. The hacker could be fearful that they will be soon discovered. So now all their data has been released and it cannot be erased before its release. All the hacker has to do is tell a friend, if anything ever happens to them, send this email out. That email would contain the passcode.

If you read the intro to this new release from that hacker, that person appears to be concerned with the loss of life that will occur if the worlds economy shift funds into preventing CO2 release. So the hacker appears to have humanitarian motives, which are a rare commodity in this post modern world.

[SteamShovel]

Maybe it is an illusion or prejudice on my part, but somehow I am not convinced that the "truth" is always worth reaching if it is at the cost of damaged personal relationships....

So disagreement is not advised in their "scientific discussion" because someone's feelings might be hurt?

What a bunch of thin skinned lizards.

[Minus_The_Bear]

The entire state of Pennsylvania is beyond disgusting.

[Rocky]

<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”.

<3115> Mann: By the way, when is Tom C going to formally publish his roughly 1500 year reconstruction??? It would help the cause to be able to refer to that reconstruction as confirming Mann and Jones, etc.

This is hilarious. One scientist is saying that Mann/Jones is an embarrassment. Meanwhile, Mann is trying to salvage Mann/Jones.

[Texas Fossil]

How can Science be about anything but the “truth”.

It either works or it doesn’t.

Except in Politics where the “illusion” is the reality.

Back in the mid 1980’s, I lived in NM. Had many Ham Op friends who worked for the labs, Air Force Bases, Army Bases, or the supporting companies for those facilities. One of the research types then told me that Science then was more about funding than it was about what they discovered. A very sad statement, and far worse today.