East Anglia, the next chapter
Summary: More argument over meaning of the files stolen from University of East Anglia.
Earlier today I blogged about the propaganda war that has broken out following the hacking of thousands of emails from the University of East Anglia's climate study center. Here's a left-wing British newspaper blog on the words beking flung about. This blogger has read some of the correspondence. Sees little meaningful and lots of missing context.
Yet one blogger sees deception and fraud, at least. Plus a little cruelty when a critic dies and isn't mourned.
Here's the Fox News version of the story.
Here's the Wall Street Journal blog. It repeats second-hand info that the emails are all genuine and there are over 3000 files stolen from East Anglia. Not sure this blogger's surmise that it was stolen by Russian black hats is vaild. But there is much interest in Russia and its rich in keeping the price of oil as high as possible as long as possible. That means any global warming treaty is a business threat to Russia, Saudi, Venezuela, Nigeria, Norway and other oil exporters. But access to a Russian-based server is not limited to Russians, of course.
This is one hack that will have a long-lasting political life. At least through the Copenhagen meeting if not beyond. Copenhagen talks begin December 7. So far no public statement from the British government which runs University of East Anglia. All publicly-funded universities there are run by the national government. The UK has long been a vocal public advocate of global action against global warming. [poll id="198"]
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Harry's world must be imploding;-)
"The evidence pointing to a growing human contribution to global
warming is so widely accepted that the hacked material is unlikely to
erode the overall argument. [b]However, the documents will
undoubtedly raise questions about the quality of research on some
specific questions and the actions of some scientists.[/b]"
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/science/earth/21climate.html?
_r=2
At least we now might have questions asked. The "evidence" is
exposed for the fabrication that it always was. I wouldn't use the term
"scientists" but I understand it must be a real shock for those at the
Time.
A sad day for believers, their trickery now exposed.
Good coverage here:
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/11/20/climate-
cuttings-33.html
LIberals addicted to extortion
Uh, no.... not liberals
and I never bought into this whole BS with global
warming being man-made or that there was any
global warming to being with.
Sorry Harry
there are too many power brokers involved for us to hear the whole truth
in a way alarmists are probably worse because they have so much invested in a theory
One way or the other.
TripleII
Well, doesn't "real science" require...
And without said "control", you cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that humans are causing global warm... er... climate change.
Good work Harry
I have noticed it too.
TripleII
Me too
sheesh -- why are you back here ?
One denial is beyond weak.
[I]?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 [B]hide the decline[/B].? [/I]
I defy anyone here to defend the bolded above in a way that doesn't show willful manipulation by said researcher. (It has to pass the laugh test).
To even those who believe man made global warming, it shows, absolutely a "scientist" covering up what the data actually shows: a decline.
TripleII
That's exactly what the data shows: a decline
arguing with that, period and done with.
People like the article writer need to get
their heads out of their butts and realize that
they have been PUNKED by the global warming
psuedo-scientists.
The fact is that the ONLY THING THAT CAN CHANGE
OUR CLIMATE IS [u]THE SUN[/u]! Period.