UPDATE3: 9:25 AM PST Having read a number of emails, and seeing this quote from Mike Mann in the Guardian:
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.
File is small for me .....less than 2 or 3 minutes to download on my FIOS connection.
Of course Mann doesn’t see anything damning in the e-mails; crroks have no moral compass.
From what I saw of the first batch of e-mails he does not need to be taken out of context to look bad. That batch was something over 1,000 e-mails, but few of them were that revealing. BUT the ones that were, told it all. They were cooking the books and playing games with honest researchers careers and funding. That is what they were exposed for doing. Bogus Science.
Is this the entire unencrypted dump?
The “Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature group” is a bunch of BUNK...
Thanks!
Despite all of these revelations - they still just keep going forward as though nothing has happened.
I took the e-mail folder and “concatenated” (cat *.txt >email.txt) the files in a single .txt file.
It appeared to be about 67 MB in size. None of it appears encrypted, but there are embedded images in the e-mails. That makes part of the e-mail look like the typical graphic file. Some were .pdf and others various types of image files.
With it all merged in a single file it is easy to navigate with at text editor. I used JuffEd and mousepad to look at it.
Excerpt from email 4064
Grey shading is a little cheat from Santer et al using a trusty ruler. See Figure 3.B in this paper, take the absolute range of model scaling factors at each of the heights on the y-axis and apply this scaling to HadCRUT3 tropical mean trend denoted by the star at the surface. So, if we assume HadCRUT3 is correct then we are aiming for the grey shading or not depending upon one's pre-conceived notion as to whether the models are correct.
bflr
To me, his is on par with the owner of the Washington Post declaring that she couldn't see how Richard Nixon ever could have won the presidential election since she "didn't know a single person who voted for him."
It is absolute proof of a tight cocoon of incompetence and ignorance the warmists live in. If they are unaware of a single voice of skepticism around the entire IPCC, they are truly lost.
Durban climate summit unlikely to get big commitments
Climategate 2.0: New E-Mails Rock The Global Warming Debate
Global warming means a lusher Toronto, councillor claims
Global Warming on Free Republic
Thanks for the link. BTTT.