| CRU hacking reveals global warming alarmists true nature |
| Written by Kristin McMurray | ||||||||||||||||
| Friday, 20 November 2009 13:06 | ||||||||||||||||
|
A hacker broke into the computer at the University of East Angila's Climate Research Unit (Hadley CRU) and published over a thousand confidential emails on the internet. (Hat tip: Telegraph UK and Watts Up With That). Some of the contents include:
Manipulation of evidence:
Suppression of evidence:
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Skeptic scientists
Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat
Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:
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….
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email this
Comments (5)
![]()
Americaneocon
said:
|
|
http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com American Power tracked-back with (a BIG roundup), 'Global Warming Hoax Breaks Wide Open as Hackers Target East Anglia Climate Research Unit!'. |
|
Alex J
said:
|
Response Since it's always good to consider more than one angle of a story, how about a gander at the initial response from the other side, including from Realclimate? http://climateprogress.org/200...-warming/ |
|
Alex J
said:
|
... Since the link wasn't automatically created: http://climateprogress.org/200...p-warming/. I just get the impression there's much zeal to take statements out of context, and suggest that certain comments are representative of general sentiments in the climatology community. |
|
Sylia
said:
|
Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes? The most common reaction of the con-artist, caught in the act is to try and change the conversation. You can run your own searches on the correspondence here: http://www.anelegantchaos.org/cru/index.php When you see threads about actively seeking to squelch contrary opinions from appearing in peer reviews by putting the thumb on the scale, so to speak, an intelligent person should be asking what is the other 7/8 of the iceburg. Its not like these people are strangers to controversy. As recently as two months ago, there were issues with the purity of the peer review process: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...l_scandal/ The emporer has no clothes. |
|

