"Smoking Gun" on the Climate Research Scandal
The first demonstration in detail - a true ”smoking gun” - of CRU scientists’ intent to defeat FOIA requests has appeared. It is long and compelling. As one might expect, it is written by one of the participants.
The author is Willis Eschenbach, a name climateaudit.org regulars will recognize and whose contributions there are much admired.
The heart of the scandal involves denial of transparency in an effort to make replication of the CRU global temperature records, raw and adjusted, impossible. This is the real scientific crime here. It means making fulfillment of legitimate FOIA requests impossible.
Accordingly the insider leaking the CRU data dump announced it by posting under the nom deguerre"FOIA."
comments powered by Disqus
Orson Olson - 11/26/2009
IT GETS CURIOUSER AND CURIOUSER. ARE THERE CRIMES in the CRU scandal?
“Jones, Briffa [both at CRU] and Mann [at Penn State] seem to have committed several criminal offences” reports Joanne Nova from Australia, with a climate scientist based in Britain as her source:
1. Misappropriation of public funds
They deliberately falsified data then used the results of the falsification to obtain additional research funding. This is criminal fraud under English Law.
2. Deliberate attempt to prevent disclosure of information that was requested under the FOI Act. They colluded to destroy information that was the subject of an FOI request. This is a criminal offence under English Law.
These two offences will do for starters, but there are others, too. Indeed, both of the above offences can be doubled by charging the alleged miscreants with conspiracy in each case. Jones, Briffa and Mann should be prosecuted as a warning to others who would pervert science as a method to promote a political agenda.
However, there is little probability that the Crown Prosecution Service will charge the alleged miscreants. It is more likely that they will be awarded Knighthoods.
And those like [George] Monbiot [the Al Gore of the UK] who colluded in all of this will say, “We did not know”.
Monbiot has repeatedly vilified those of us who have been championing the cause of science against the unfounded climate scare. He is not alone in such behaviour.
Climate realists and our work have been vilified and smeared. Entire web sites have been established to tell lies about us. Publication of our scientific work has been inhibited, and personal attacks have been the norm: for example, I have had computer systems damaged by concerted attacks, Lomborg has had a pie pushed in his face, some (e.g. [Hans] Tenekes [in the Netherlands], [Pat] Michaels [at UVa], etc.) have had their employment terminated, and Tim Ball [prof emeritus, University of Winnipeg, Canada] has had death threats.
Monbiot seems to be covering himself now what has been happening is plain for all to see as a result of the stolen (?) CRU files having been released.
In a side meeting organised by Fred Singer at an IPCC Meeting in London in 2001 I said; “When the ‘chickens come home to roost’ – as they surely will with efluxion of time – the journalists and politicians won’t say, “It was our fault”. They will say, “it was the scientists’ fault“, and that’s me, and I object!
I can still see no reason to change that opinion.
- Historian Allan Lichtman who’s predicted 30 years of presidential elections correctly is doubling down on a Trump win
- National Book Award semifinalist Heather Ann Thompson says the war on crime started with LBJ
- David McCullough's next book will focus on generations of Northwest pioneers
- British historian Sheila Lecoeur is on trial for defamation
- Jim Downs laments that Americans still aren’t being taught LGBT history