JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

ClimateGate III — the password is out

FOIA has been in touch with skeptics today. Here is the email below, sorry, without that password. There are 220,000 emails in the file. There may be private information which could cause grief that is not related to taxpayer funded work. Obviously that large file is not in a form that can be released publicly yet. I do hope people are very very careful with the password.

This is your chance to understand why FOIA did what they did, and your chance to say thanks to the person who quite possibly saved us from a bureaucratic coup in Copenhagen in 2009. The draft treaty promised to take up to $140 billion from some and redistribute it to others. As Christopher Monckton revealed, sovereign nations would be ceding powers to a group of foreign officials, but the document did not have the words “election” or “democracy” or “vote” or “ballot”.

To all those who think, post hoc, that Copenhagen was never going to succeed anyway, I say that in November 2009, when I asked the carbon traders which outcome the money was betting on. The answer was: we don’t know. The players are out of this market.

You can leave your messages for FOIA below. I’m sure he or she will be back here to read them :-)

===================================

Subject:  FOIA 2013: the password

It’s time to tie up loose ends and dispel some of the speculation surrounding the Climategate affair.

Indeed, it’s singular “I” this time.  After certain career developments I can no longer use the papal plural ;-)

If this email seems slightly disjointed it’s probably my linguistic background and the problem of trying to address both the wider audience (I expect this will be partially reproduced sooner or later) and the email recipients (whom I haven’t decided yet on).

 The “all.7z” password is [redacted]

DO NOT PUBLISH THE PASSWORD.  Quote other parts if you like. Releasing the encrypted archive was a mere practicality.  I didn’t want to keep the emails lying around. I prepared CG1 & 2 alone.  Even skimming through all 220.000 emails would have taken several more months of work in an increasingly unfavorable environment.

Dumping them all into the public domain would be the last resort.  Majority of the emails are irrelevant, some of them probably sensitive and socially damaging.

To get the remaining scientifically (or otherwise) relevant emails out,  I ask you to pass this on to any motivated and responsible individuals who could volunteer some time to sift through the material for eventual release. Filtering\redacting personally sensitive emails doesn’t require special expertise. I’m not entirely comfortable sending the password around unsolicited, but haven’t got better ideas at the moment.  If you feel this makes you seemingly “complicit” in a way you don’t like, don’t take action.

I don’t expect these remaining emails to hold big surprises.  Yet it’s possible that the most important pieces are among them.  Nobody on the planet has held the archive in plaintext since CG2. That’s right; no conspiracy, no paid hackers, no Big Oil.  The Republicans didn’t plot this.  USA politics is alien to me, neither am I from the UK.  There is life outside the Anglo-American sphere.

If someone is still wondering why anyone would take these risks, or sees only a breach of privacy here, a few words…

The first glimpses I got behind the scenes did little to  garner my trust in the state of climate science — on the contrary.  I found myself in front of a choice that just might have a global impact.

Briefly put, when I had to balance the interests of my own safety, privacy\career of a few scientists, and the well-being of billions of people living in the coming several decades, the first two weren’t the decisive concern.

It was me or nobody, now or never.  Combination of several rather improbable prerequisites just wouldn’t occur again for anyone else in the foreseeable future.  The circus was about to arrive in Copenhagen.  Later on it could be too late.

Most would agree that climate science has already directed where humanity puts its capability, innovation, mental and material “might”.  The scale will grow ever grander in the coming decades if things go according to script.  We’re dealing with $trillions and potentially drastic influence on practically everyone.

Wealth of the surrounding society tends to draw the major brushstrokes of a newborn’s future life.  It makes a huge difference whether humanity uses its assets to achieve progress, or whether it strives to stop and reverse it, essentially sacrificing the less fortunate to the climate gods.

We can’t pour trillions in this massive hole-digging-and-filling-up endeavor and pretend it’s not away from something and someone else.

If the economy of a region, a country, a city, etc.  deteriorates, what happens among the poorest? Does that usually improve their prospects? No, they will take the hardest hit.  No amount of magical climate thinking can turn this one upside-down.

It’s easy for many of us in the western world to accept a tiny green inconvenience and then wallow in that righteous feeling, surrounded by our “clean” technology and energy that is only slightly more expensive if adequately subsidized.

Those millions and billions already struggling with malnutrition, sickness, violence, illiteracy, etc.  don’t have that luxury.  The price of “climate protection” with its cumulative and collateral effects is bound to destroy and debilitate in great numbers, for decades and generations.

Conversely, a “game-changer” could have a beneficial effect encompassing a similar scope.

If I had a chance to accomplish even a fraction of that, I’d have to try.  I couldn’t morally afford inaction.  Even if I risked everything, would never get personal compensation, and could probably never talk about it with anyone.

I took what I deemed the most defensible course of action, and would do it again (although with slight alterations — trying to publish something truthful on RealClimate was clearly too grandiose of a plan ;-) .

Even if I have it all wrong and these scientists had some good reason to mislead us (instead of making a strong case with real data) I think disseminating the truth is still the safest bet by far.

Big thanks to Steve and Anthony and many others.  My contribution would never have happened without your work (whether or not you agree with the views stated).

Oh, one more thing.  I was surprised to learn from a “progressive” blog, corroborated by a renowned “scientist”, that the releases were part of a coordinated campaign receiving vast amounts of secret funding from shady energy industry groups.

I wasn’t aware of the arrangement but warmly welcome their decision to support my project.  For that end I opened a bitcoin address: 1HHQ36qbsgGZWLPmiUjYHxQUPJ6EQXVJFS.

More seriously speaking, I accept, with gratitude, modest donations to support The (other) Cause.  The address can also serve as a digital signature to ward off those identity thefts which are part of climate scientists’ repertoire of tricks these days.

Keep on the good work.  I won’t be able to use this email address for long so if you reply, I can’t guarantee reading or answering.  I will several batches, to anyone I can think of.

Over and out.

Mr. FOIA

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.7/10 (147 votes cast)
ClimateGate III -- the password is out, 8.7 out of 10 based on 147 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/abafcrz

398 comments to ClimateGate III — the password is out

  • #
    janama

    here we go again :)

    Hopefully this will be the end!

    131

    • #
      Quack

      the end is nigh!!! i cant wait to read the juicy bits!!!

      65

      • #
        Quack

        please please please tell us Jo what did mike do this time???

        214

        • #
          Nice One

          Hey Quack, I’m pretty certain that the release of these emails will stop sea levels from rising, the oceans from gaining heat, the arctic sea from disappearing, animals and plants from migrating polewards, glaciers from melting, antarctica from losing mass, land, sea surface and atmospheric temps from increaasing and the satellites will no longer show an increase in radiation being trapped at the wavelengths of GHGs. Powerful stuff!

          242

          • #
            PeterB in Indianapolis

            Sea levels are barely rising, and in many places AREN’T rising at all, ocean heat content is steady, the Arctic is rapidly re-gaining ice after the superstorm that destroyed a bunch of ice this past summer, Antarctic sea ice is almost 1 million square kilometers ABOVE NORMAL for this date, most glaciers are gaining mass, and sea surface and land temps have been pretty steady for 17 years now.

            Any more questions?

            443

            • #
              handjive

              Globally they are rising, and the change is not expected to be the same everywhere.

              According to the latest NOAA sea level budget, global sea levels rose at only 1.1 – 1.3 mm/year from 2005-2012, which is less than half of the rate claimed by the IPCC [3.1 mm/yr] and is equivalent to less than 5 inches per century. Contrary to alarmist claims, sea level rise decelerated over the 20th century, has also decelerated since 2005, and there is no evidence of any human influence on sea levels.

              Ocean heat content is steadily rising

              The Travesty of the Missing Heat — deep ocean or outer space?
              If there is a planetary imbalance in energy, and Earth is acquiring more heat than it’s losing, we ought to be able to find that heat.
              Energy can not be created nor destroyed. It has to be somewhere.
              The missing heat is certainly not here!

              The Arctic gains ice every winter, but the long term trend is a decline that is happening faster than models predicted.

              “The Arctic gains ice every winter”, and the Arctic ice melts every summer!
              Nice one does comedy as well, or do you think that was a scientific statement? For junk climate science, it is probably acceptable.
              And, “it is happening faster than models predicted!”
              So nice one, you admit that your models have failed (much like ALL your UN-IPCC/CSIRO climate models).
              When you produce a model that hasn’t FAILED, that has proven evidence, maybe you might be onto something!
              Ho Ho! what a joke! Oops, nice one is serious. Pick a year, nice one, any year!
              P.S. A powerful storm wreaked havoc on the Arctic sea ice cover in August 2012.
              This NASA visualization shows the strength and direction of the winds and their impact on the ice.

              Pay attention, I said Antarctica Mass, not just the sea ice surrounding it.

              Maybe those failed models you use which “under-estimate everything” (It’s worse than we thought) can explain how the antarctic can lose mass when “it has OFFICIALLY not gotten warmer over the last 30 years.”
              Of course, now there’s more ice at South Pole than ever, though warmer air may cause increased antarctic sea ice cover according to AGU & NASA.
              Maybe nice one was watching the scientific 60 minutes when he saw the antarctic melting!
              Oops, seems the models failed again as they contradict each other. Did anyone mention the science is settled?

              “There is mounting evidence that climate change is triggering a shrinking and thinning of many glaciers world-wide …”

              And nice one links the failed UN-IPCC as evidence!
              One year on, Rajendra Pachauri speaks of regret at false assertion that Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035
              Alaska: For the first time in the area’s recorded history, area glaciers have begun to expand rather than shrink.
              Karakoram glaciers didn’t get the global warming memo.
              A team of French glaciologists has recently confirmed that these glaciers on average have remained stable and may have even grown slightly in recent years.

              The data disagrees with you.

              And your UN-IPCC high priest, Choo Choo Pachauri, disagrees with you.

              Oh dear. How inconvenient.

              [post was caught in moderation because of the number of links] ED

              91

              • #
                Nice One

                According to the latest NOAA sea level budget, global

                Your link is NOT to global levels.

                The missing heat is certainly not here!

                You missed the argument completely. I said the heat was increasing. Your random distractions did not address this point.

                “The Arctic gains ice every winter”, and the Arctic ice melts every summer

                Yet again you failed to address the argument. You write a lot of crap, but failed to address the point that the Arctic Ice is in a long term decline.

                P.S. A powerful storm wreaked havoc on the Arctic sea ice cover in August 2012.

                Maybe, but one storm in 2012 didn’t createthe long term decline in summer sea ice or the loss of thick multiyear ice that has been gradually happening over the past few decades.

                Of course, now there’s more ice at South Pole than ever,

                Yet again you fail to properly address the argument. For the second time now I have to point out that I referred to Antarctic MASS, not just the sea ice. When will you stupid twits get it right instead of repeating crap?

                Alaska: For the first time in the area’s recorded history, area glaciers ..

                FFS. Address the argument. GLOBAL!! Picking out a glacier here or there is NOT the same as measuring GLOBAL glaciers.

                And your UN-IPCC high priest, Choo Choo Pachauri, disagrees with you

                Your link doesn’t work, but frankly I’m not convinced much by news.com.au articles. Next time provide some data or peer-reviewed science instead of newspaper articles.

                And FFS, address the argument instead of all this crap.

                38

          • #
            ColdOldMan

            All hail CO2, the saviour of the planet! What would we do without you? Grow baby, grow.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-nsU_DaIZE&feature=youtu.be

            40

          • #
            Quack

            and as Jo says statistically we are in a cooling period now!!!

            20

          • #
            Popeye

            Nice One

            “the oceans from gaining heat” – is that correct?

            Read this and then come back to all of us here and explain EXACTLY how you’re going to measure all that ocean heat gain.

            What an ABSOLUTE joke you are!!

            My bet is that you won’t even respond to this (if you read it) – but that’s OK – I’ll ask you the same question EVERY time I see you post BS about oceans warming or “gaining heat”.

            Cheers,

            11

          • #
            Nice One

            Sea levels are barely rising, and in many places AREN’T rising at all

            Globally they are rising, and the change is not expected to be the same everywhere. http://sealevel.colorado.edu/files/2013_rel2/sl_ns_global.png

            ocean heat content is steady

            Steadily rising. http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT

            the Arctic is rapidly re-gaining ice after the superstorm that destroyed a bunch of ice this past summer

            The Arctic gains ice every winter, but the long term trend is a decline that is happening faster than models predicted.

            http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.anomaly.arctic.png

            And the thickness (multi year ice) has also decreased.

            Antarctic sea ice is almost 1 million square kilometers ABOVE NORMAL for this date

            Pay attention, I said Antarctica Mass, not just the sea ice surrounding it. As for the sea ice, influences stronger than the warming are affecting that.

            most glaciers are gaining mass

            Baloney! “There is mounting evidence that climate change is triggering a shrinking and thinning of many glaciers world-wide …”

            sea surface and land temps have been pretty steady for 17 years now

            The data disagrees with you.

            Any more questions?

            Will you support your statements with evidence next time?

            414

            • #

              Wow….. is nice one actually Mann if not the list of garbage is.
              Evidence is data, not your mates interpretation of it. Skeptics rely on the truth portrayed in data by qualified people. Not the minority that distort this myth and still quote unpublished papers. or yet scrutinized and press releases of same.
              Reality disagrees with you …. ever considered asking questions instead of googling the how to answer on alarmists sites?
              Truth is evidence and the real world is evidence. This is our support….
              DATA not some activists interpretation of it.

              40

          • #
            Nice One

            @Popeye, it’s not me measuring the heat, it’s the fleet of Argo buoys.

            Off the cuff I can spot several problems with your blogger science.
            - the heat goes in during the day and the heat flow from ocean to air is restricted by increased thermal layer of atmosphere redirecting the energy back down. And yes his dozens of heaters WILL result in water temperature that would higher than without heaters.
            - His calcs regardin “The ocean contains a colossal 1,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 litres of water!” are incorrect because we’re not suggesting that the entire ocean has increased by that much.
            - His “Let’s put this amount of energy in perspective.” comment seems pretty stupid given it’s not the energy from our homes heating the oceans, its sun.
            - His comment “Well, unfortunately for every ton of water there is only a kilogram of air. “. So what, we’re not extracting the energy from the air, the additional energy that would otherwise go back out to space is being redirected downwards by GHG.

            I’ll stop there because frankly thats enough wasting time on shit science.

            Come back when you have something credible to offer.

            45

            • #
              Popeye

              Nice one

              “@Popeye, it’s not me measuring the heat, it’s the fleet of Argo buoys.”
              – You forgot the link to prove your warming meme!!

              “- the heat goes in during the day and the heat flow from ocean to air is restricted by increased thermal layer of atmosphere redirecting the energy back down. And yes his dozens of heaters WILL result in water temperature that would higher than without heaters.”
              – BS again NO link and you haven’t said HOW you will measure the immeasurable!!

              “- His calcs regardin “The ocean contains a colossal 1,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 litres of water!” are incorrect because we’re not suggesting that the entire ocean has increased by that much.”
              – here we go AGAIN – who’s WE and your BS is SO predictable – of course the entire ocean hasn’t increased that much because it’s a PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILTY – that’s what he’s saying fool. Or is the “missing heat” hiding somewhere at the bottom of the ocean just like the mssing heat in the troposphere keeps hiding – ha ha.!!

              “- His “Let’s put this amount of energy in perspective.” comment seems pretty stupid given it’s not the energy from our homes heating the oceans, its sun.”
              – Oh, it’s the SUN is it? Well at least you got that right – d’oh – it’s a pity some other warmists didn’t admit that it’s the sun – we’d be a lot further forward with REAL science if that was the case!!

              “- His comment “Well, unfortunately for every ton of water there is only a kilogram of air. “. So what, we’re not extracting the energy from the air, the additional energy that would otherwise go back out to space is being redirected downwards by GHG.”
              – Where TF are we extracting the energy from then?? You need to seriuosly look at what you post BEFORE you make a fool of yourself!! Are you also saying that NONE of the heat goes to outer space because of the horrible CO2 blanket that does EXACTLT what the glass does in a REAL greenhouse – al I can say is BS!!

              “I’ll stop there because frankly thats enough wasting time on shit science.”
              – Good idea Nice one because you haven’t actually responded with any science at all.

              “Come back when you have something credible to offer.”
              – I could say ditto but would rather say – looking forward to hearing back from you!!

              Cheers,

              42

            • #
              Richard C (NZ)

              Following this ocean warming discussion by email feed from ‘Man-made Warming Disproved’ with interest and copying to this thread under ‘Notes on ocean “warming” ‘ at Climate Conversation Group here:-

              http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2013/03/notes-on-ocean-warming/#comment-182399

              Suggest that this Climategate thread is not the forum to continue the discussion.

              10

      • #
        Quack

        i tried “out” it didn’t work.

        312

      • #
        Quack

        Can we get an update on what the juuuuuicy bits are. im dying to know what they did this time!!!!

        00

  • #
    Bruce Cunningham

    Very good! Hopefully FOIA will be able to step forward in the near future. He mentioned career changes had occurred. Maybe he doesn’t need to be concerned about his job anymore.

    200

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Maybe he doesn’t need to be concerned about his job anymore.

      Possibly. But you can bet that some lawyers, somewhere, will be trying to find ways to seek redress.

      As FijiDave points out, FOIA is one very courageous person.

      452

      • #
        Peter Lang

        Yes. He could be maliciously attacked for years until they break him. In fact, I’d say that is inevitable. I’d advise him to take no risk of exposing his identity or allowing himself to be found out.

        260

      • #
        Bulldust

        Well Mr FOIA put a smile on my face … it’s like a gift that keeps on giving. Can’t wait for the self-righteous indignation from the CAGW camp.

        240

        • #
          Nice One

          I can’t wait for something other than the usual out of context dribble that the previous “climategates” gave us.

          332

          • #
            PeterB in Indianapolis

            Yes, when the evidence is damning, claim that it is “out of context”. That generally works!

            241

          • #
            SimonV

            Neither of the two previous “Climategates” resulted in anybody getting “damned”, so it seems the little snippets cherry-picked by the anti-science lobby were indeed out of context and the interpretations they were shoe-horned into were all completely wrong.

            121

          • #
            handjive

            Nice one & Simon V, remind us all again how well the UN-IPCC Copenhagen Climate conference went after the release of Climategate1.

            101

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            … little snippets cherry-picked by the anti-science lobby were indeed out of context …

            Well, you obviously can’t mean the Physicist, Chemists, Geologists, Mathematicians, and Engineers who contribute to this site, so I presume that, “the anti-science lobby” you refer to are the Psychologists and Sociologists, and Climate Scientists who wouldn’t spot a solar cycle unless somebody was riding it to work.

            And what is with this title, “Climate Scientist” anyway? What is wrong with Atmospheric Physicist, or even Climatologist? Can it be that Climate Scientists are not real scientists at all? Shirley Knot.

            132

          • #
            Backslider

            Nice One, you should get a job with Julia Gillard. You can both then together declare “I didn’t know that I did it!”.

            70

    • #
      jollygreenwatchman

      Only job change ? How about the pressures of lawfare ? Like, the following sort of thing: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324178904578340192542126424.html

      “Czech President Faces Treason Charge”

      50

      • #
        Streetcred

        That is appalling but demonstrates the vindictiveness of the leftists. Vacluv Klaus is an honourable man.

        152

        • #
          SimonV

          Not many “honourable” men get prosecuted for treason.

          Maybe if Klaus wasn’t pushing a political barrow and trying to persecute the truth-tellers he wouldn’t have the problem he now has.

          119

      • #
        Bruce Cunningham

        Unfortunately, you are probably correct. If s/he worked at CRU, then whistleblower laws might protect them.

        80

  • #
    FijiDave

    I say, “Well done!”, and a big “Thank you!”.

    You are a brave person.

    500

  • #
    Fred

    History will show that you may have saved the world from tyranny.

    431

  • #
    Mark D.

    Never in the history of this world has so much been owed to so few one. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

    591

  • #

    One (hu)man can indeed change the world. Good show and thank you, Mr. FOIA and everyone else involved in blowing the lid of this mess (Jo this means you too). Cheers-

    421

  • #
    Jaymez

    Assuming this is validated, then when the identity of Mr FOIA is ascertained, I suggest the Nobel Committee rescind Al Gore and the IPCC’s ridiculously awarded joint 2007 Nobel Peace Prize and re-issue it to Mr FOIA!

    551

  • #
    janama

    Interesting post at Bishop Hill – the first to announce CG3.0

    “Filtering\redacting personally sensitive emails doesn’t require special expertise.”

    ….but it does require integrity.

    Mar 13, 2013 at 2:46 PM | Green Sand

    Another reason why CG3 was not sent to RealClimate!

    461

  • #
    Manfred

    A great debt of thanks to an individual who so obviously embodies integrity and a sense of the greater good, and who articulates and acts to expose a creeping decay of moral relativism. Without such unique individuals, one shudders with dismay at the future prospects of humanity with an inevitable and long delay in achieving the flourishing society to which we all aspire. Few recognise opportunities, fewer still act on them.

    451

    • #

      “Few recognise opportunities, fewer still act on them.”

      *

      So true, Manfred. When I think of all those “scientists” who took the money… boy, that makes me mad. Especially as time went on and they knew what the repercussions on civilization would be, and how it’s impacting even now – and still they feed their poison to the masses.

      290

      • #
        Dennis

        Spare a thought for the people have died because of the actions of the left

        200

        • #
          Tim

          Millions starving as a result of diverting land from food because of that great green initiative : ‘biofuels’ is just one example.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLQC9h53bWY

          Mr FOIA is nothing less than a modern-day saint.

          261

          • #
            Wooster

            Tim,

            I believe it was the Bush administration who were the main proponents and who “boosterised” biofuels. Nice right-wing agenda conveniently blamed on others.

            Here’s an article on the World Bank report into the issue.

            http://grist.org/article/biofuel-bombshell/

            419

          • #
            Winston

            Weak argument, Wooster.
            The US President is the bought and paid for head of a corrupt corporation. Every bad decision of GWB has been continued by Obama, often in spades. There is no difference between Democrats or Republicans, not one jot. And both sides of the political divide are equally guilty of boosting biofuels contrary to logic, as is the UN and the World Bank and any other synthetic front for Western banker interests, because they have all one thing in common- they don’t care one jot how many people die as a consequence of any alternative fuel policy.

            They are not on the side of the poor or the 3rd world (no matter what they pretend to the contrary), nor are they on our side either, they are on their own side, alongside with the corporatocracy, arm in arm, hand in glove. What about that don’t you get? Are you always this naive?

            265

          • #
            ExWarmist

            Winston is correct.

            The pretense of conflict between the Republicans and Democrats is simply useful theatre and part of a systematic process of providing an illusion that the common man has a say in his own future when he casts a vote.

            It doesn’t have to be that way – but it has been that way for a long time in the US.

            143

          • #
            Tim

            Absolutely, Winston. In 2012, about 40% of America’s corn crop was grown for bio fuel – these 5 billion bushels of corn could have fed about 412 million people for an entire year. Instead, they turned it into 13.5 billion gallons of corn ethanol.

            Contrary to logic alright and contrary to humanity, but nicely in line with a eugenics agenda.

            60

          • #
            PeterB in Indianapolis

            Nice try, but anyone who knows politics knows that Bush wasn’t very “right-wing” at all… sure, if you compare him to Gore or Kerry, then yeah, right of them, but to claim that there is any real, significant difference between the Republicrats and the Demicans in the US is laughable really. Two sides of the same coin wearing different colored ties.

            41

    • #
      SimonV

      So you believe the PR that has been attached to this release of stolen emails?

      Not very sceptical, are you?

      112

  • #

    You Sir, have given great service and you’ve done it uncommonly well. Look after yourself, time to rest now.

    http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/climategate-a-crisis-of-conscience/

    Pointman

    351

    • #
      Truthseeker

      Pointman,

      Seems like it was a hack after all and not an inside job.

      40

      • #
        cohenite

        Seems like it was a hack after all and not an inside job.

        Why do you say that, given this?

        100

        • #
          wes george

          If FOIA doesn’t want to be found and if (s)he was a whistle blower from inside the UEA, (s)he would naturally pose as something he or she is not in emails to be made public. There only evidence about FOIA identity in the email is what (s)he wants us to think about his or her identity.

          50

          • #
            SimonV

            If FOIA was a fossil-fuel funded professional hacker from a firm like HB Garry, he would naturally pose as something he is not in emails to be made public. The only evidence about FOIA identity in the email is what he wants us to think:

            Clearly, posing a one-man-band, FOIA is really a professional institution paid to undertake this act of illegality.

            [And you post about skeptics hosting conspiracy theories? Ha Ha] ED

            115

        • #
          Truthseeker

          Well Cohenite, I used to accept Pointman’s excellent analysis, until the above email which says things like …

          If this email seems slightly disjointed it’s probably my linguistic background …

          and

          …neither am I from the UK.

          Both of these suggest that FOIA is not a resident of the UK and therefore probably not an employee of the CRU.

          I may be wrong though …

          60

      • #
        ExWarmist

        Based on what evidence?

        40

  • #
    Kevin Lohse

    I wonder what form the damage limitation will take? Will the AGW crowd use the various FoI Acts to find out what is known behind the password, or will they insist that the emails are stolen property and should not be read at all? Wait for the West’s law enforcement agencies to start taking an interest under Government pressure

    120

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      The PR spinners will take the line that this release is just more old files from the hack into the UEA computers that happened ages ago. It is therefore almost ancient history.

      Move along folks, nothing to see here.

      201

      • #
        turnedoutnice

        Don’t believe it.

        In the e-mails, there is clear evidence that the hockey stick meas a deliberate fraud.

        As for the science, more of the same once competent people get to work out how the scam was done.

        51

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Sorry, I should have made it clear that I was referring to the establishment’s Spinners — the army of PR wonks and lawyers they employ at tax payers expense to hide the bumps under the carpet.

        140

    • #
      Ian H

      I think the basic strategy is already clear. The media will field this one by simply ignoring it.
      There is no mention of the password release in any of the mainstream media that I can find so far.

      81

      • #
        ExWarmist

        The MSM is busy digging it’s own grave with the shovel of irrelevance.

        271

        • #
          Winston

          Two thumbs up for the wit inherent in that comment. Warmed the heart it did!

          51

        • #
          SimonV

          Alternatively, the media is treating this nonsense with the same seriousness [snip]

          [no evidence offered and off topic] ED

          111

          • #
            ExWarmist

            Hi Simon,

            What part of the business model of the MSM includes the requirement to tell the truth – rather than to promote what is interesting.

            …Oh look it’s Britney…

            51

  • #
    Linde

    The good news is that a successful effort to empty the policy codeword: ‘sustainable development’ of content in the relevant sciences proceeds and proceeds aapace. Those who have been to the fore in this project will know that no good deed in this area will go unpunished. A new and better class of enemies has noted their successes.

    But among a happy few, some day may FOIA stand and be recognized.

    The Agenda 21 blueprint and action plan for planetary collectivization is in place in the Western world.

    Although the ‘sustainable development’ codeword may be shown to be empty of scientific content, it still stands throughout policy infrastructure. Agenda 21 has created ongoing collaboration between national, state, local gov’t in partnership with private sector, community organisations, NGOs in the the development and implementation of national policy that integrates all dimensions of human social and private life over the long term.

    The following is a pretty good diagram of the policy map:

    http://www.naturaledgeproject.net/ESSPCLP-Intro_to_SD-Lecture11.aspx

    Agenda 21 put in place the policy engines to shut down Western economies.

    The bad news is: once the discredited science behind GW is discredited in the minds of the mass – so much so that even the media must acknowledge ‘the Emperor has no clothes’ – then The Party will simply substitute a different codeword throughout this policy infrastructure and Grond will roll on.

    241

    • #
      Dennis

      And the Australian federal government is helping, the most dangerous mob we have ever experienced

      140

    • #
      Bite Back

      So let us do what we can to stop it. Nothing works as well as exposure, exposure, exposure.

      190

    • #
      Alice Thermopolis

      PACHAURI REAFFIRMED IT IN FEB 2013 DEAKIN UNIVERSITY SPEECH

      Go to: http://www.deakin.edu.au/news/2013/22022013Pachauriaddress.php

      Pachauri outlines how “climate change” is the Trojan horse with which proponents of “sustainable development” intend to conquer the developed world.

      He begins by saying that AGENDA 21 “laid down a roadmap on how the world should move towards sustainable development. Unfortunately, a lot of that was never really translated into action. So last year the Rio+20 Summit produced a 52-page follow-up document – THE FUTURE WE WANT – which is a wish-list of all the things that need to be done. It was agreed to by all countries and private sector CEOs etc.”

      “One cannot have sustainable development unless you deal with climate change, because some of the poorest societies on Earth are clearly the most vulnerable.” Etc. [ UN concept of climate debt]

      “And we need to bring about changes in institutional arrangement. These could be regulatory bodies, local government laying down certain benchmarks and guidelines; and most importantly creating knowledge across the globe.”

      “And finally, I think lifestyle and consumption patterns can also make a major difference in terms of reducing emissions of GHGs.” Etc.

      University media release of 22 February 2013 noted his visit coincided with disorder in the macrocosm. Divine intervention or non-anthropogenic natural variability?

      “As flights in and out of Melbourne were cancelled as a freak storm hit Melbourne, the chairperson of the Nobel Peace Prize (2007) winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Director General of The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) Dr Rajendra K Pachauri, urged people to use the knowledge they now have at their disposal to mitigate the impacts of climate change and pursue development in a more sustainable manner.”

      132

  • #
    Jud

    Thank you FOIA.

    Doing the right thing is often hard – and you have most assuredly been fighting the good fight.
    You can hold your head high.

    Thanks again and good luck…

    190

  • #
    Robert

    It’s spring break here in the states so I’m off to the slopes, there’s a lot of that cold white stuff we aren’t supposed to be seeing anymore due to all this <cough> warming…

    For those of you who were on the receiving end of “the password” don’t work too hard, take your time and do your work professionally as that alone will make those defending this nonsense look bad as history has shown us they are unable to do either.

    I’ve often said to those who think one person can’t make a difference “think of what one idiot on the road can do to traffic.”

    In this case we had one observant individual who was aware the bridge was out and if people kept speeding along they would find their destination wasn’t the one they’d planned on. The released emails were akin to throwing the car across the road to stop as many as possible from crossing a bridge that wasn’t there. Too bad so many kept insisting the bridge really was there and urged or forced others to continue heading towards the abyss…

    Though by now we all should have recognized that this never was about the climate it was all about convincing people to cross that non-existent, imaginary bridge in order to save it.

    Good day all.

    290

    • #
      Jon

      Just woke up to minus 20 deg C outside and the forecast is another dump of snow next week, 15 cm. Adapt or migrate?

      50

  • #
    Safetyguy66

    Exciting times. I can so strongly relate to the poster’s motivations. I was recently asked to “leave” a major Australian construction project for having the hide to confront the client on matters of serious safety risks. I approached the client knowing it would probably be the end of my time on the job, but not being able to sleep knowing workers were being put at risk. I hoped the client would stand by their corporate safety window dressing rhetoric and back me up, but I was naieve and it cost me a well paid job. So full marks to the poster for having the courage, it doesnt come easy and often the personal cost is high. However for me at least and obviously for them too, the cost of doing nothing is higher. I am humbled to be in the company of such people.

    340

  • #
    Alexander K

    Mr FOIA is a very brave, moral and intelligent individual who deserves the gratitude of all.
    Note that Leo Hickman of the Guardian is the first so-called enviro-journalist to attempt to assign grubby and money-gouging motives to FOIA – says more about Hickman and his ilk than it does about FOIA.

    340

    • #
      SimonV

      Alternatively, “Mr FOIA” is [snip]

      [no evidence offered. Getting tired of this kind of comment. Self edit or you'll be moderated.] ED

      18

  • #

    I, my Family, and my Descendants thank you from the bottom of our hearts.

    191

  • #
    Linde

    When he was Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio of Argetian, the new pope Francis I, was a leading critic of national policies that violated human rights and institutionalized poverty. He will certainly lead the Church in the developing word to oppose the Carbon Credit trading schemes that are destroying the lives of the poor.

    “Argentine Catholic Church Says Human Rights are Violated by Extreme Poverty”
    http://en.mercopress.com/2009/09/30/argentine-catholic-church-says-human-rights-are-violated-by-extreme-poverty

    121

  • #
    Grant (NZ)

    Mr FOIA – your compassion and concern for the poor of society is most laudable. What you have done and the risks you have taken is most commendable. Thanks are due to you.

    181

  • #
    Bruce

    The climategate files we only one component that led to the Copenhagen debacle. One other was the attitude of the Chinese who were not ready to sacrifice development for what they regarded as some nebulous theory. It may take some time, but the end of the global warming scare is coming to a sorry end after governments have thrown huge amounts of money that could have been spent down the drain.

    150

  • #
    Safetyguy66

    Hey Alexander, just reading some of Leo’s stuff. There is a little bit of gold in the responses to his article challenging the claim in a recent Attenborough doco on Africa that parts of the country have warmed by 3.5c in 20 years. The laugh is, most of the people posting on that forum that obviously look to Leo for support in bolstering AGW stocks have really savaged him for pointing out the BS in an otherwise brilliant career of environmental presentations from DA.

    This post would have to pretty much sum up how many AGW disciples see the use of facts and truth in this debate.
    —————
    Danabanana
    08 February 2013 3:40pm

    60@LeoHickman – So, you have your own fake Polar bear den moment. Congrats.

    “All the more reason for the BBC to get the facts right. The realities of climate change hardly need embellishment…”

    Oh, but they do need embellishing. Haven’t you noticed that most people still don’t care about GW? you’d think that with the current data, the vanishing ice and all the other going-ons people would have got the message by now but this isn’t the case.

    ———————-
    The data does need embellishing ??

    So if you believe something is for the greater good (in your opinion) and the data isnt helping your cause, its ok to just make it up?

    Well that was no surprise to me whatsoever. I guess I also shouldnt be surprised that people would be so open about it when the depth of their delusion has led them to a place where what their mum told them about making things up being bad, has just gone by the wayside.

    And in all this, people like FOIA have to risk their futures, their income, their privacy and perhaps even their personal safety to just get some damn facts into the debate.

    Its a disgrace. Intellectual wannabes, so convinced of their own BS that they advocate outright lies to try an direct action toward their personal bent. I am utterly appalled.

    210

    • #
      Robert

      Don’t forget that many of those individuals through their arrogance, conceit, and ill behavior regarding this issue have painted themselves into a corner and now have nowhere to go. For them it HAS to be true because the fallout and reprisals they face otherwise is more than they could ever survive.

      130

      • #
        Jon

        Plan A was to convince the public with the tactic that its a “scientific fact and the debate is over(UNFCCC) it’s time to dismantle/destroy the Western World that is based on capitalism”.
        And eventually pave the way for their International Marxist revolution?

        81

    • #
      ExWarmist

      You will find this interesting.

      30

      • #
        Safetyguy66

        Very interesting. While I am pretty in favour of liberal gun laws, I have of late been wondering about the culture surrounding so called “heroes” and how in any other context these people would indeed be regarded as dangerous phsycopaths. I thought the release of the latest Bruce Willis movie in which he introduces his son to the concept of solving problems with extreme violence, that basically it couldnt have been timed worse and that the cycle is now pretty much complete for hollywood.

        While I dont subscribe to the notion that watching a movie turns you into a killer (and this is where the post gets relebvant to the thread, sorry Ed.) Its clear that the media has a massive impact on the minds, beliefs and behaviours of some. This topic is a classic example, some people refuse to see the wood for the trees and to finish with another movie reference, that is all too relevant to this debate.

        “The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you’re inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inert, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.”

        Indeed some people have so much invested in this debate, they certainly have painted themselves in to a corner.

        I remain ready to change my views in any direction supported by evidence, so far my assessment of the evidence is that AGW is utter bunkem at best and at worst its some sort of way to keep the 3rd world from developing.

        20

  • #
    KinkyKeith

    FOIA’s exposure of the personal motivation behind CAGW Pty Ltd was the turning point.

    The best thank you we can give him is to continue the process of exposing the fraudulence of all aspects of

    the scam and to have a definitive statement made for all the world to hear that Climate Change – Global

    Warming was always a scam. Somebody above has already suggested that this special moment might be the

    revocation of Algores Nobel Peace Prize.

    The world would notice.

    KK

    272

  • #
    Keith L

    “USA politics is alien to me, neither am I from the UK. There is life outside the Anglo-American sphere.”

    That is a ruse to throw us off the track. I suspect Mr FOIA is none other than BORIS JOHNSON!!

    ;)

    Nice job, Boris!!!

    40

    • #
      Joe V.

      I don’t know if renewed speculation on the identity of Mr FOIA is entirely in order, but the papal reference did remind me who has changed his employment status quite drastically recently.

      110

  • #

    This is great news. I know Mr FOIA said there will be no surprises, but I hope there’s something in there that will blow the lid off this scam the rest of the way. I hope there is something truly devastating, something that will grab the attention of the MSM (doubtful, I know, but CG1 did get some cover), blow the minds of the public and finally rivet attention on the real issues.

    I cannot thank Mr FOIA enough. It’s a wonderful thing to find, in this day and age of disgrace, that there are still people with outstanding moral strength who fearlessly do what’s right. How many have done that for the entire world? We owe you so much.

    160

  • #
    Joe V.

    If the Nobel Prize can be awarded to such abstractions as a committee , the IPCC, and to a Governmental institution, the EU, then surely only political will would stop it from being awarded to this saviour of mankind, an actual but unknown person, incognito.

    111

  • #
    2dogs

    Isn’t it rather risky for him to give a BitCoin address? How safe are those things from prying eyes?

    50

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Nothing is truly secure on the publicly accessible internet.

      71

      • #
        Joe V.

        Well he’s done pretty well so far, despite all the governmental resources that Norfolk Constabulary were able to call on.

        100

    • #
      David

      It is possible to hide the owner of a Bitcoin address. Bitcoin addresses (aka account numbers) can be created offline. Transactions are always public and you must use anonymous software (e.g TOR) to maintain privacy.

      10

  • #
    Peter Pond

    This news blew the announcement of the new Pope from the front pages of the MSM /sarc

    Thanks FOIA and Jo (and the many others)

    81

  • #
    Ace

    Better even that the information release is the fact that those in the spotlight evidently do not know who among them they can trust any more.

    Kind of like the prospect I outlined yesterday has been realised already.

    I relish the discomfort and uncertainty that must cause them. I love the idea they cannot talk to a single colleague candidly for fear it might be leaked.

    This whole scenario I find deeply, deeply, worryingly…enjoyable to behold!

    Maybe it compensates slightly for my freezing cold feet due to my inability to afford Green-taxed heating to a comfortable temperature.

    Maybe thats a tiny hint of how Green-afflicted people may start to regard those responsible for the destruction of their jobs, businesses, lives, and the visceral response to which it may yet lead.

    81

  • #
    Winston

    FOIA’s words give lie to the Philip Sheahan belief that Climategate was the act of anonymous “Russian hackers”. It is clearly an act of conscience by a lone insider, who took an opportunity open to him through his access, based on what he saw as a distortion of scientific process for less than edifying motivation. His inability to sort through 220,000 emails to thoroughly screen their content is consistent with this thesis, and his stated beliefs (whether Philip et al agree or not) are that CAGW is being used by the PTB to facilitate the entrenching of 3rd world suffering in the guise of helping it.

    His courage and principles are inspirational, and stand in stark contrast to the proponents of this theory, who demonstrate their callous disregard for their fellow man (not to mention honesty and integrity) with every touch of their keypad. I am concerned that FOIA will be killed for his troubles, as our collective governmental masters have no conscience about such acts of revenge against perceived heretics, not dissimilar I’m sure to the fate of the lone Tianemen Square protester whose iconic photograph had such a galvanising effect. I hope I’m wrong, but we don’t live in a sane or just world, and the lunatics who oppose us are religious zealots whose level of delusion prevents them from even glancing at their moral compass.

    200

    • #
      ExWarmist

      Spot on Winston.

      50

    • #
      The Black Adder

      Yep… Well said Winston.

      50

    • #
      The Black Adder

      JFC, brother of KFC.
      Employed by the ABC.
      Begot from the GFC.
      Your mum should have used an IUD.

      Your analogy of a Kenyan Birth Certificate, with the release of CG3.0 is pathetic!

      The end is near…

      You have every right to feel threatened by what will come out in the next few days.

      Your job at The Climate Commision may be in jeapordy!

      In ordering xtra popcorn!!

      51

  • #
    Yonniestone

    From when I was a child to now my perceived heroes have shifted greatly, and not that long ago I had none, only on a path of self education and maturity can I begin to understand the real heroes and their ability to do right when the majority will not and without seeking fanfare or recognition of their sacrifice’s. Your actions and words have moved and inspired me and as I wipe a tear I and many others would like to say thank you and remember you are not alone, and never will be.

    121

  • #
    Dave

    .
    What price will the EU CO2 credits be worth after this.

    Sell at any price :) Great news.

    100

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    I started reading this near the end of what has been a long and frustrating day of butting my head against one brick wall after another. And then I read this,

    Oh, one more thing. I was surprised to learn from a “progressive” blog, corroborated by a renowned “scientist”, that the releases were part of a coordinated campaign receiving vast amounts of secret funding from shady energy industry groups.

    I wasn’t aware of the arrangement but warmly welcome their decision to support my project. For that end I opened a bitcoin address: 1HHQ36qbsgGZWLPmiUjYHxQUPJ6EQXVJFS.

    which as Clint Eastwood might say, MAKES MY DAY! :-P

    You have a consummate sense of both humor and irony, not to mention an even more valuable (and apparently rare) commodity, a conscience; something lacking in so many of the world’s so called leaders, political, academic and otherwise.

    I shall go on into my evening with a big smile on my face.

    I don’t know who you are but from me to you, thank you!

    220

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    And now the fallout should be a thrill a minute and a pleasure to watch! :-P

    92

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    And now will the people who should wake up and take notice actually do so? Or will they try to shrug it off, FOIA be damned, full speed ahead.

    Very interesting times we live in, one way or another.

    But for now, I smile and enjoy it. :-P

    91

  • #
    Dennis

    What will Tim say, and Greg, Julia, Bob, Christine and all the other deceivers.

    131

  • #
    ianl8888

    From Tallbloke’s website (he too has the password):

    “>I do
    >find the dismissal of the Medieval Warm Period as a meaningful global event
    >to be grossly premature and probably wrong. Kind of like Mark Twain’s
    >commment that accounts of his death were greatly exaggerated.
    -Ed Cook-

    Lol. Suck it up Mikey

    Analyses like these by people who don’t know the field are useless.
    A good example is Naomi Oreskes work.
    -Tom Wigley-

    Multilolz. Chew on that you loathsome hag”

    Wot can one say ? :) :)

    151

  • #
    john of sunbury

    God bless you FOIA. My children’s children thank you.

    111

  • #
    JFC

    I’m sure there’ll be a Kenyan birth certificate buried in there somewhere. Probably empirical evidence that the earth is flat as well.

    [Either stay on topic, and add something useful to the debate, or get turned off - your choice] Fly

    239

    • #
      Crakar24

      Now hang on a second Fly the birther comment was funny.

      [Perhaps - but given the potential significance of this thread, I am keeping a tight rein on things at the moment] Fly

      72

    • #

      I’m told that alarmists now have a rational and incontestable explanation for the Medieval Warming. An all-powerful Creator just deposited the written and physical evidence for it.

      There was, of course, no MWP, or not much of one. The Creator was merely testing the faith of his Worshipful Brethren of the Hockey Stick. They really came through!

      102

    • #
      ExWarmist

      JFC …

      Is that the best that you have got?

      A weak attempt to discredit the email contents?

      The really thin ice in this world is the ice underneath your ideology – those cracks you can hear must be scaring you silly.

      41

    • #
      handjive

      It was failed “scientific consensus” that “believed” the world was flat.

      It was failed “scientific consensus” that “believed” the sun orbited the earth.

      Indeed JFC, there WILL be evidence of failed UN-IPCC junk consensus climate science buried in the emails.

      80

      • #
        JFC

        Handjive, I have no doubt it will be a storm in a teacup, just like the last 2 times. The junk science crowd will go na-na’s for bit and everyone will probably ignore them. I wonder if it will even make the news?

        318

        • #
          Backslider

          JFC – here is something nice for you from your Aunty: Climategate II

          91

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            Those agreed on facts have been around for a long time already. So the whole thing is lost on JFC and the rest of the global warming pushers.

            I think the new revelations will include direct evidence of fraud on the part of key players that cannot be shrugged off as I pointed out yesterday. I’m having a hard time believing that FOIA took what is probably a risk to his/her reputation, career and possibly civil or criminal prosecution for less than a “smoking gun”.

            I hope I’m right.

            40

    • #
      ExWarmist

      Hey JFC,

      Now is your chance to demonstrate that FOIA was really…

      [1] An Agent of the KGB.
      [2] Funded by Exxon Mobil
      [3] A member of Heartland
      [4] Funded by the Koch Brothers
      [5] A card carrying member of the Republican Party.
      [6] Someone who enjoys dining on a nice plate of fresh kittens for breakfast.

      There you are – I’ve done your (so called) “thinking” for you. Perhaps you can invent some more empty and absurd claims to smear the messenger and avoid confronting the lies that you apparently believe in.

      110

      • #
        Jon

        All of the above and in addition he is a racist capitalist with ties to the NRA and beats women, kids and animals?
        Give the dog a bad name and let it hang?

        70

    • #
      connolly

      JFC – Its over. On September the 14th steelworkers, coal miners and large numbers of betrayed workers are going to end in this country, the most corrupt political machine in the parliamentary western world’s grip on power. While they threw thousands of workers out of work, raised the price of power and caused poor people to choose between staying warm and getting a decent feed Obeid, McDonald and Maitland (more to come) traded corruptly in coal mining licences. It isn’t just Climategate that helped to expose the CAGW corruption but ICAC and the arrogance of the liars and green spinners and scammers. Enjoy it while it lasts smart arse. Less than six months.

      171

    • #
      Backslider

      Probably empirical evidence that the earth is flat

      Well, the AGW models are known to use a flat earth, so it must be, huh?

      50

  • #
    Bite Back

    Kiss me, JFC!

    Oh, with a smile :-)

    40

  • #
    ralph selman

    Thank you for your action. I have used some of those E-mails to convert about 15 of my friends so far, with hopefully more to come.

    102

  • #
    Richard deSousa

    SO, it’s an inside job by someone in UEA disgusted with the lies and coverups. I base my decision on a couple of links I browsed. Let me know if he’s telling the truth or BSing me.

    http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2010/12/17/why-climategate-was-not-a-computer-hack/

    http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2012/07/27/so-was-climategate-a-hack-after-all/

    90

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Pointman has a reputation for being reasonably accurate in his assessment of events.

      121

    • #

      A guygal called Jimmy/Jimmi Bostock from Melbourne I think claimed authorship briefly when Climategate 1 broke, gave some details, some of which sure made sense, on his blog, then about January he closed the blog down, said he had done his job and was onto other ventures in computing.

      31

      • #

        guy or gal, I was assuming the first.

        30

      • #

        Oh Tom, what can I say … perhaps just post what I have said on Mr Watts’ site …

        I have to agree with the many comments that call for an end to speculation on the identity of FOIA. I can’t see what the benefit is in that activity.

        While there has been much mirth around the efforts of the law enforcement bodies in this, it appears that they have given the search for the ‘culprit’ a real crack and have come up empty-handed. That makes sense. Whoever FOIA is, they clearly have some smarts that would make it very difficult to locate them (or at least prove that they are responsible).

        So, if the cops have not been able to track FOIA down, it has to be asked what hope a bunch of commentators have?

        Surely it is more productive to look at what FOIA has said about their motives and how we, all in our own little way, can amplify the message.

        For me, this chap has been one of the better advocates of my own interest in the whole global warming thing – the effects on the poorest of the world. I am a simple man and I say one thing – electricity for all. The undertones of the alarmist message smells, to me, like it will lead to people who need and deserve an accessible energy source not getting it.

        This FOIA chap seems to really get that and is completely motivated by that.

        I would suggest that we collectively swing away from the minutia of the ‘science’ of AGW and create a movement around the very simple principle – everyone deserves to have abundant energy and, right now, this can be delivered through carbon based sources – and therefore, that is how it should be delivered.

        We should rally against the notion that ANY argument or concern is more important than the welfare of the “millions and billions” who struggle with the lack of a reliable and abundant energy source.

        With that as our ultimate message, who really cares about who FOIA is. It’s just not that important. Finding out will not advance the cause one bit.

        50

  • #
    cohenite

    OT but this makes me mad; at OLO this was posted:

    There is a rumour going round that some right wingers want to ditch the rape laws.
    Clearly the Australians laws are having minimal effect on a world wide basis, as a percentage of total world wide rapes Australia account’s for a considerably less than 1%.

    1. Medical science
    Has not proved that being raped is physical harmful, provided the rapist does not use physical force, which would no longer be necessary as rape would no longer be illegal.

    2 The positive effects
    Less women murdered or injured because of no risk of going to jail.
    Women could claim they were raped, when if in fact they were having an affair, which in turn would lead to lower divorce rates.
    The resources of the police would be available for other tasks such as catching out scientists who lie on their research applications.

    3.Whether policy an improvement
    Jails less crowded
    Money saved on housing prisoners
    _____________________________________________________________________

    Now Jardine K. Jardine that is total bullsh!t.
    I have extreme prejudice against people who are determined to rape this planet, for some short term ill-conceived gain, based on some of the stupidest arguments I have ever come across.
    It may have escaped your notice, but liveable planets are hard to find ,and we are well on the way to trashing this one.

    I hope the liberal party will wake up before it is to late, that just because a law or (Carbon) tax is not having an earth shattering effect ,does not mean we should not impose it.

    Posted by warmair, Thursday, 14 March 2013 10:37:07 AM

    First Williams comparing sceptics to paedophiles now sceptics are being compared to rapists.

    120

    • #

      ummm actually they are comparing release of CO2 to rape.

      44

      • #
        cohenite

        ummm actually they are comparing release of CO2 to rape.

        I have extreme prejudice against people who are determined to rape this planet

        Sceptics?

        80

      • #
        Winston

        Equating exhaling CO2 to raping the planet? Talk about the madness of crowds, you collectivists really are losing your grip, aren’t you.

        110

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        ummm actually they are comparing release of CO2 to rape.

        Words are too easy to throw around and it may be hard to tell who the intended audience really is. Sometimes I think it must be spoken with the speaker as the audience; a sort of, “There, I put you in your place — at least in my own mind,” kind of statement. If some thought had been given to it the words would never have been said.

        The thoughtless nature of the statement makes it all the more offensive. :-(

        40

      • #
        Mark D.

        ummm actually they are comparing release of CO2 to rape.

        Ummmmmmmm actually, they are comparing the male sex organ to CO2.

        (yes I have a hard time saying penis in polite company)

        50

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Seems maybe not so hard (to say it, that is) and I’m glad you qualified it, else I’d have to ask, which one(s)? ;-)

          20

    • #
      Robert

      Someone really needs to buy some of these people a dictionary so they understand exactly what the word rape means and that one cannot rape an object which is what the planet is.

      40

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Anatomy lessons too!

        30

      • #
        Mark D.

        Well Robert, she is Gaia after all. Something seems terribly wrong with the notion ideation of “raping Mother Nature”.

        I think you might have to see this matter through their green colored glasses.

        Besides that, warmists like Brookes (and probably many more) think that Skeptics are outdated gray-haired old men. Therefore this rape concept fits together with their gender, age and science bigotry.

        50

  • #
    DaveA

    Information wants to be free.

    What is the password?

    50

  • #
    Credirt

    Thanks Mr FOIA, from the bottom of my heart!! Wish there were more like you – not just dodgy “Anonymous” hacktivism (I.e. infiltrated)

    …if you consider the possibility of the Aus 2010 election being rigged, to give the greens a swaying role, to guarantee the Climate tax would was passed….

    ….you do well to hide yourself from this power

    72

  • #
    realist

    History records it’s courageous individuals that make the difference to the progress of humanity. The ones who are prepared to stand up against tyranny in all its shades and nuances, in the artistic, technical, scientific, political and other spheres.

    Humanity has always risen up and fought against political doctrines, whether dressed in diguise as a religion, or a blatant tyrannical political philosophy. The intent and outcome is always the same: total loss of freedom, with death the only way out.

    The common theme is always centralised control and retribution for those who dare to challenge the orthodoxy. It always stars with subtle, plausible and incremental social manipulation before morphing into outright propaganda. Always a few winners controlling massive numbers of losers ending in different forms of slavery; body, mind and economic.

    Nothing changes, only the technology used to gain advantage over others. The aggressive seeking power over the passsive.

    Human nature encompasses a spectrum of character, from the absolutely beautiful and benevolent, to the downright ugly and dangerous, with many shades of grey in between. It’s the shades of grey we mostly deal with, the egotistical useful idiots, sociopaths and occasionally outright psychopaths, and they are far more common in our midst than most believe.

    The controllers behind stay hidden behind the screen so others take most of the blame when it eventually unravels. No one can control the unconcious in humanity or for that matter any organisms. A simple example is resistance of microbiology, insects or plants to biocides. Technology and the power hungry junkies can never win. Their inflated egos just convince them otherwise.

    We should always celebrate and support the courageous ones, such as Mr FOIA, Jo, Anthony, Steve, and a host of other truth seekers who dare to bring forth and speak the truth for humanity, to bring light into the darkness of blantant deceipt and expose the ugly ones who seek to force themselves into every facet of our lives by removing our hard fought for freedoms. A big thankyou from everyone. Bravo. We salute you.

    190

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    As long as the emails are used judiciously and with some restraint, this can only be a good thing.

    May I suggest three obvious steps in analysing the stash.

    Compile a metadata database and use the email headers (and inline quotes or datestamps) to connect replies to the email they were responding to, so the flow of conversation is recovered.

    Do a text search for words (and synonyms) of things we would find interesting. As a first step, only emails which contain these words should go on to further study. This way, anything not explicitly and consciously published will be withheld by default.

    Create a graph (network) out of the full data set in which nodes represent authors and edges represent an email sent by one person to another. When an email matches a keyword search, you can use this “social network” of CG3 to figure out which other authors (and their emails) from the full data set should be inspected more closely for related information which was expressed using words different to what you initially searched.

    How many people have been given the password? Will skeptics have enough eyeballs to make some progress without releasing any subset of the emails to more volunteers?

    Hey who needs a Bloggie award when you’re on Mr FOIA’s speed-dial? ;)

    120

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      update: Steve Mosher has already extracted header metadata and is building a keyword searchable database:

      The first order of business for me is going to be sorting mails to see which have personal info and which dont. because they cant be released without redaction. I’m still noddling around for an approach.

      Redacting personal stuff will take quite a while unless it is targeted at topics of interest. If someone else leaks the plaintext that redacting effort may seem wasted, but I am impressed mosher is putting in the effort to at least try to do the right thing up front.

      10

    • #
      amortiser

      Great to see FOIA is alive and well.

      There is something about this latest development that doesn’t make a lot of sense in the context of The CG1 and CG2 releases.

      FOIA has given the password to a select, trusted few because of the volume of emails and the mixture of personal and irrelevant content.

      If this is so then how were CG1 and CG2 releases compiled without going through the entire compilation of emails?

      IIRC there wasn’t a huge time lapse between the release of CG1 and the latest dated email so it may be that the download was actually a number of files compiled for FOI purposes. The relevant emails had already been extracted from the total population with the leftovers left in a separate file.

      When it became apparent that the FOI file would not be released, FOIA acted and secured the files for his own release. I think that he then split the FOI release file into 2 parts to maximise the impact and make the miscreants nervous.

      Given this, there is little likelihood that there will be a lot of further relevant emails relating to the “science”. As alluded to by FOIA there may be a lot of material relating to the miscreants dumping on each other. While this may have little to do with solid science it may be instructive about the lack of cohesiveness within the group.

      40

  • #
    Ace

    I saw this on WATTSUP:

    “With that much material it is literally impossible to eliminate everything that could be quoted out of context to cause the harm you fear. Troublemakers will be able to take what you think safeto release and re-hash it in such a way that it will still be harmful. In fact they could make up complete lies about anyone related to the parties involved and claim these lies were released by you from confidential material. noone will check back.

    They could also claim that what you withold includes sensitive confidential material and that this itself breaches privacy laws.

    Its even possible that associates of the principals will even now be afraid of what transactions in their private affairs may or may not be revealed, specifically BECAUSE you are witholding the mails andpreventing them seeking reassurance by checking.

    Remember the Australian telephone hoaxers whose prank recently caused a nurse to kill herself. How could they foresee that? How can you foresee the implications of every last e-mail How would you know if one parties reference to his location at a given time at aconference bar suddenly contradicts his story to his wife as to where he really was at the time?

    The course of action you are placed upon is dangerous. We live in desperate times (at any rate, I do) and you have no option but take the least dangerous route, which is to release the entire package untampered.

    Just think how phrases like that will otherwise be applied: you “tampered” with the files?

    Do it. Do it now. Do it fearlessly for “he who dares wins”.”

    I agree.

    110

    • #
      wes george

      Ace,

      Those are all great reasons NOT to release the password.

      It would be brilliant if the media decided to run big scandal stories about Climategate III “sensitive confidential material…breeched privacy laws,” etc.

      Material that can only be followed by going to you nearest helpful skeptical blog! HA HA HA.

      I’m pretty sure Aunty is not going to be making a big stink about Climategate III. Mums the word.

      Assuming the mainstream media wants to report on specifics of Climategate III, keeping the emails a monopoly preserve of key skeptical blogs empowers those blogs to control the content available to the media, rather than allowing the media to cherrypick the emails to support their alarmist narrative.

      We all know the climate debate has been nothing if not one massive global exercise in propaganda and information suppression.

      Finally, the skeptical community have been gifted the kind of gatekeeping authority over a set of information that will allow it to set the terms of the narrative rather than the alarmists.

      That advantage should not be frittered away lightly.

      140

      • #

        Well said, Wes. The media could wave around a few nothing emails and claim we have nothing. We do not need a bunch of on the fence media followers saying, “Oh, is that all. Those skeptics are crazy, they have nothing.” We have to take the time, gather what we can and reveal it with all the punch it packs.

        51

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Ace, Wes,

        I have a hard time figuring out which approach will be the better. It’s that old problem of predicting the future. Let’s allow those who do have the password to make their decisions as they see best. There will be some undesirable consequences either way and I don’t have the file or the password so I haven’t the right to second guess those who do.

        We’ll see the first salvo soon enough I think. :-)

        40

    • #
      wayne, s. Job

      Those that work for tax payer money are also subject to the laws of theft. Theft can be a paper clip or a lap top it can also be the use of a computer for private business , thus all these emails are public property paid for by the tax payers.

      Thus any dirty laundry in these emails is public property and the thieves have no right to privacy. Protecting these thieves of public money because the emails have private business in them is a mistake. They should have used their own phones and private email accounts and not sponged on the public purse.

      Let the dice fall where they may and the mongrels in the pack will be evident.

      41

  • #
    Star Craving Engineer

    And a very, very few have greatness thrust upon them yet remain forever obscure.

    Thank you, Mr. FOIA.

    40

  • #

    Big thanks to Mr FOIA. In the long run it’s the whistleblowers who will be remembered as the true heroes.

    71

  • #
    john robertson

    At first I agreed with the controls suggested for this password.
    But consider this, because of the actions of the Team, FOIA was forced to expose them.
    They too had the same choices and chose deceit.
    That deceit has cost trillions of dollars to be diverted(stolen?), poor people to starve and our freedoms to shrink.
    I say release the word, any family dirt and personal damage to these useful idiots pales to insignificance compared against the harm they enabled.

    110

    • #
      wes george

      John,

      I have no sympathy for the UEA con artists either. But it’s not about them.

      The fact is that the media – with the ABC leading the charge – will already be conspiring to paint this as a vile, hate-based attack by ‘denialists.’

      The media would love for something very personal and private to be revealed which has nothing to do with climate. They’ll use it to smear the skeptics as hateful. Just like they did with the imaginative ANU report of “denialist death threats” to the ABC (but oddly not to the AFP until sometime later, btw, the AFP declined to investigate after reading the innocuous emails.)

      For instance… the best possible gift to the ABC would be for an email to be released early that outed one of the UEA climate scientists as gay. This would be instantly spun as proof that “denialists” were complicit in hate-speech, out to violate the human rights of a minority group. Proof that skeptics are fat, racist, homophobic pensioners, armed to the teeth and potential violent, as portrayed by the ABC Drum.

      Just this morning Fran Kelly on RN morning used some rude protest against PM Gillard as evidence that evil wife-beater Tony Abbott is out whipping up misogyny in the public. Never mind that the worst of the protestors was a woman, or that ABC always approves of abusive protests if they come from the left of politics as a sign of legitimate outrage against obvious injustice.

      The media isn’t even going to report on climategate III, unless it can somehow spin it as an illegal act of harassment. Therefore, the skeptics should not hand the media off-topic talking points, at least not early on.

      Later, say a year from now, when Climategate III is old news – assuming there is some personal dirt in the files – maybe it should come out to use the media’s own bias to publicise the Climategate emails to audience that might well never have heard of them in the first place.

      181

      • #
        john robertson

        Wes. thanks that makes sense, Timing is everything in media wars.
        However I would point out the MSM will use that tactic anyway,they promote political correctness as a means of neutering honest discussion.

        I have been enraged since reading the first CRU email dump, I very nearly fit the stereotype.
        How does ABC figure “armed to the teeth” when Australians were robbed of their guns?
        Naturally the media believe their complicity will be overlooked or that attention can be deflected,
        I am armed with a taste for the truth and an intolerance for lying, conniving sycophants.
        Especially those sucking the lifeblood from the productive.(And injecting poison?)

        30

  • #
    zebudi

    @ realist #45

    Very nicely put. :)

    31

  • #
    Streetcred

    Maybe kudos to Dr Tim Ball whose recent open letter to FOIA may have triggered this enormous event.

    72

  • #
    Mike Mckee

    I’m with John Robertson.
    Just thinking about the people needing assistance or education opportunities in our own countries but not getting it because of the use of these funds beggars belief.

    40

  • #
    PeterS

    All scams come to an end sooner or later. Once this is over, the massive law suits may start to roll out against many of the institutions that deliberately went along with the scam, such as perhaps the CSIRO.

    91

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    I am surprised at the amount of alarmist nonsense being offered as a justification for releasing the password. It is astonishing that “skeptics” would accept the argument that because we cannot foresee all possible consequences to our actions that we should therefore not even try.

    How many bridges would still be standing today if civil engineers believed that because they cannot predict the strength of the largest cyclone or largest tsunami that will ever occur in the future that therefore no effort should be expended on design at all?
    Should the Boeing 767 have never been built because the designers did not anticipate it would be flown into a building one day?
    Even if (as the post-modernists claim) the ultimate perfect truth is unattainable to us, the last 2000 years is a story of people deciding that knowing something was better than knowing nothing.

    The present holders of the password do have a tough choice.

    They have the hard option, which is to expend effort at separating the useful from the dross, effort towards limiting collateral damage, effort towards keeping confidential the potentially embarrassing words of people who thought they were writing in some confidence and whose words add nothing substantial to the question of a global warming hoax.

    They also have the easy option which is to abandon any responsibility for the consequences of a full leak and release the password to all and sundry. I have never heard of any personal tragedies arising from the full leaks of CG1 and CG2, so they could assume it (again?) won’t happen and take the risk.

    Anyone who thinks the easy route always leads to the best outcome has learned nothing.

    Exposing the personal foibles of a few demonstrable conspirators in order to settle an issue of international importance is easily justifiable, but what of the authors of the other 218,000 emails that will be totally irrelevant to our purpose?

    Mr FOIA took a risk in obtaining this information. To have his actions create any consequences greater than he intended simply through laziness on our part is dropping the ball at the last yard.

    120

    • #
      Quack

      what happened in cg2 i must have been awol on that one

      110

    • #
      ExWarmist

      Very well said.

      71

    • #
      Robert

      We have numerous examples of the lack of ethics, morals, professionalism, regard for the law, etc. from “the other side” Gleick would be a prime example.

      We all know the password will be out there eventually, no need to rush it. Lets take some time and let those who, thus far, have shown they understand restraint, what is and isn’t relevant to the issue, who will remember to redact personal contact information etc. dig out the nuggets.

      They say all good things come to those who wait. Not sure about the rest of you but I don’t have any desire to go digging through 220,000 emails when I have tests coming up, a job to deal with, things around the house that need to be done etc. Personally given the volatility of this issue and what we’ve seen from “the team” I would be very wary of giving the password to anyone chomping at the bit to get into the file. Anyone in that much of a hurry is probably going to shoot themselves in the foot with it.

      121

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      Further to the above, I have just noticed that Anthony at WUWT has no qualms about doing exactly what I warned against.
      He posted some scuttlebutt from Tom Wigley about Naomi Oreskes’ social analysis being useless. Not a sign of a hoax, not a departure from scientific method, not a sign of environmental or UN pressure, not even much of a sign of deception or false consensus, just some off-the-cuff talk totally irrelevant to the purpose of global warming scepticism.
      I guess today it is Anthony’s turn to run a Climate Cleo rag.

      If Mr FOIA’s 12 disciples don’t police themselves this is all going to turn into a bad joke very quickly. It must pain him to have let it out of his control and see it so quickly abused.

      Hey Mr FOIA, put your cap on, get to an internet cafe, and comment on this please.

      41

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        And further to the above I just noticed Anthony said he saw it on junkscience.com first.
        Well that just makes him an accomplice to the same misdemeanour.
        And Steven Milloy is clearly not above posting junk of his own.

        Maybe these guys will get serious when their blood cools off.

        21

      • #
        Nice One

        Andrew, hate to break this to you darlin, not all “skeptics” care whether or not the emails are real evidence of wrong-doing. Just so long as you can show that people disagree then you are creating “doubt”. The reference to Oreskes should have prompted this thought.

        49

        • #
          Robert

          Hate to break it to you “darlin” but those pushing this fraud like Gleick, Hansen, Mann, et. al. have had no problem with doing just what you stated above yet it would appear you are okay with that behavior as long as they are the ones doing it. Why is that?

          94

          • #
            Robert

            It is an interesting observation that whenever one of us makes an observation on the duplicity, hypocrisy, and other moral and ethical failings of those pushing the AGW/CC meme that we usually see one or two thumbs down clicks on our comment. In this particular case I suspect it would be from the troll to whom I was responding. We would have to then surmise that we are right on target with our comment and it cuts too close to the bone for them to handle.

            Anyway, still waiting for an answer on why this particular troll finds unethical behavior acceptable as long as it supports his/her views…

            62

      • #

        If your reading comprehension was better or you read more of the article you would have seen that the comment you are talking about was part of the CG2 release, so has been in the blogosphere quite a while.

        20

        • #
          Andrew McRae

          Actually richard, if your reading comprehension was better you would have noticed from my comment that it does not matter how long he email has been out in the open. Idle scuttlebutt is irrelevant to the purpose of climate skeptics, but relevant to the purpose of bitter mudslingers.

          In his first “Update” to the post Anthony apologetically said (my bold):

          Update – the first email I posted apparently was part of an earlier release [...] so I have added a second one.

          Note singular noun “email” and use of singular “was” instead of plural “were”, so it is not a typo.
          This implied the first email, NOT THE THIRD ONE ABOUT ORESKES, is the only duplicate and that further emails after the first are new from CG3. So even Anthony did not know the 3rd email was a duplicate from a previous climategate!

          Even more curious is that in Anthony’s “Update 6″ he implies Mann made a confession:

          Wigley accuses IPCC and lead authors of ‘dishonest presentations of model results’; Accuses Mann of deception; Mann admits
          Mann: “Its (sic) hard to imagine what sort of comparison wouldn’t be deceptive.”

          He put the full quote from the email just below. Two sad facts about this Update 6 from Watts:

          1) It is easy for anyone to see that Mann is not admitting to deception at all.
          He is saying that the word deceptive would lose all meaning if it included “showing the full spread from CMIP3″. Mann says the figure shows a compendium of results across several models. Wigley points out PCM did not match observation very well. Mann thinks the figure is not deceptive in aggregate. Wigley claims its deceptive because it doesn’t help show inaccuracies from one particular model. It doesn’t matter which of these views is the “right” one or the best one for a particular purpose, the point is Watts implies this quote is an admission of deception when it isn’t, it’s the opposite. If Watts is going to make up false accusations of secret confessions he could have done this at any time, he didn’t have to wait until CG3, or CG2/CG1 for that matter.

          2) This is yet another email (5060) from a previous ClimateGate release, which does not come (exclusively) from CG3. What happened to the apology for recycling old climategate releases?

          Does Anthony Watts have reading comprehension as poor as yours, or is he intentionally and pointlessly mudslinging? Maliciousness or incompetence? It’s a tough choice.
          If there is ever going to be a serious investigation of the hoax hypothesis using these NEW source documents, it clearly hasn’t started yet.

          00

    • #
      Ace

      Andrew Macrae:
      “How many bridges would still be standing today if civil engineers believed that because they cannot predict the strength of the largest cyclone or largest tsunami that will ever occur in the future that therefore no effort should be expended on design at all?”

      Thats a really silly analogy. The apt version would be that trying to favourably edit the mails is like a dozen people wjho arent engineers trying to design a bridge without knowing where its to be built, what its to be built with or what is to cross it.

      Its preposterous.

      20

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        Ace, this quote from Bishop Hill takes the opposite view:
        “Filtering\redacting personally sensitive emails doesn’t require special expertise.”

        Your belief that the skeptics are incapable of predicting what information is LIKELY to be personal and unnecessarily embarrassing (ie they are not qualified email engineers) is merely a cynical stereotype for which you have adduced no evidence or testimony. To the extent that assumption may be a case of projection, it would only expose your own ineptitude in such human affairs.

        HYPOTHETICAL 1: “Hey Mike, could you fake a scary graph for me, we need it for Tuesday’s AR4 press release.”
        * Unqualified Judgement: Relevant to climate skepticism. Not personal.
        * Action: Redact email address to prevent spam, but expose identities of author and subjects. Publish.

        HYPOTHETICAL 2: “Hey Mike, I can’t make Tuesday’s AGU conference because I’ll be in Oregon.”
        * Unqualified Judgement: Maybe author was cheating on his wife with a girl in Oregon and will pretend to be at the conference that day. Any number of embarrassing back stories could be imagined. Potentially personal, but NOT relevant to climate skepticism.
        * Action: Withhold entirely, do not publish.

        HYPOTHETICAL 3: “Dear IPCC, the latest opinion and analysis from Greenpeace is blah blah blah.”
        * Unqualified Judgement: The fact it was sent does not mean it was acted upon or even read at all. Not Personal. But NOT relevant to climate skepticism.
        * Action: Withhold entirely, do not publish.

        HYPOTHETICAL 4: “Hey Mike, I read this Greenpeace newsletter yesterday. I think our current section on attribution does not go far enough but these Greenpeace guys really know how to write in a way that will move the politicians into action. Please try to incorporate the Greenpeace script somehow. If you have to dump the peer-reviewed references and text that’s okay. Thanks.”
        * Unqualified Judgement: Shows activist lobbying is influential. Not Personal. Relevant to climate skepticism.
        * Action: Redact email address to prevent spam, but expose identities of author and subjects. Publish.

        HYPOTHETICAL 5: “Phil, I don’t care what the f*^#ing policy says, or what your mate Briffa says about 1100 AD, we are in the business of making Hockey Sticks and you will make me a Hockey Stick for the report or else a whole lotta people are going to find out what you were really doing in Oregon with Sandy during last year’s AGU – AND the subsequent taxpayer funded abortion, that’s final.”
        * Unqualified Judgement: Contains very personal information. Also contains information relevant to climate skepticism.
        * Action: Manually replace peoples names with a role identifier such as [IPCC124], [CRU002], and [OTH001]. Remove email addresses. Publish.

        It’s not difficult, Ace. You don’t need to be a qualified social engineer.

        00

  • #
    Arnost

    To release the entire file immediately or not should be an on the balance of probablity choice.

    This (probably) was a single file or directory with specifically identified emails prepared on the presumption that the various FOIA requests current at the time will be complied with. The FOIA’s were not and so the file was left archived.

    This being the case – what is the risk that it contains privately damaging material? I would suggest that this material was already redacted, and so the risk of false “tampered with” emails being released (and causing equivalent or worse harm) is greater. The only way to prevent this is to have a unimpeachable source / confirming each release – and that is the full file.

    Given that the principal characters know what is in there, it may be a chivalrous exercise to ask them [privately if need be] to provide a list of emails that they consider private, and these can be censored / redacted in any publically acessible databse.

    I would release the full database now – for odds on, the password will leak out soon enough anyway.

    40

  • #

    There is some automated analysis of earlier ClimateGate emails at:
    http://www.tome22.info/TypeViews/Emails.html

    The emails and associated people are linked into a larger database covering AR4, NGOs etc. This can be accessed from: http://www.tome22.info/Top/ResearchEntrance.html

    The whole database is being rewritten and there are some areas that have obviously never worked.

    Is there any potential going further with this approach?
    (Cross posted on Bishop Hill)

    40

    • #
      mike smith

      when climategate first appeared, I uploaded all the emails into analyzethe.us
      it’s a freely accessable version of palantir. the videos on their analysys blog at palintir.com blew my mind. Its amazing software.
      anyway it will ingest the text and is smart enough to understand email addresses as well as sender and recipients, and even servers if the actual email headers are intact.
      anyway it will build relationships among the people in the emails and even relationships to external entitys. for example in the initial batch I found U.S. legislation relationships, so someone must have mentioned a particular bill or piece of legislation that was also in the analyzethe.us data sets.
      it was fun but I soon realized it was a huge undertaking to pour through it all, and after while I lost interest in it. plus I didn’t really know what to look for.
      if you want to play with it on your own I certainly recomend it.

      another fun route would be splunk.
      you can get splunk for free and it will index all manner of local files, like a folder of 220,000 emails. the free version is limited only to 500 megs of data per day, which for this exercise would be fine.
      The benefit of splunk is that it is very fast at indexing and much more useful than say the windows search function.

      So all that said, if you’re interested in a searchable database, you can easily do it yourself with the above tools.

      30

  • #
    ExWarmist

    FOIA says …

    The first glimpses I got behind the scenes did little to garner my trust in the state of climate science — on the contrary. I found myself in front of a choice that just might have a global impact.

    Briefly put, when I had to balance the interests of my own safety, privacy\career of a few scientists, and the well-being of billions of people living in the coming several decades, the first two weren’t the decisive concern.

    It was me or nobody, now or never. Combination of several rather improbable prerequisites just wouldn’t occur again for anyone else in the foreseeable future. The circus was about to arrive in Copenhagen. Later on it could be too late.

    Those millions and billions already struggling with malnutrition, sickness, violence, illiteracy, etc. don’t have that luxury. The price of “climate protection” with its cumulative and collateral effects is bound to destroy and debilitate in great numbers, for decades and generations.

    Simple, humility and compassion in operation for all with the wit to see.

    Note that for the psychopaths that are running the CAGW Terrorize, Enslave & Slaughter Campaign – humility and compassion are both vices to be eradicated. For those of us who are normal human beings who are capable of empathy, love, compassion, humility & self-sacrifice for others – it is encouraging to see what an effective shield that humility & compassion can be against the machinations of the power elites.

    171

  • #
    Linde

    Mr FOIA’s personal efforts will help bring to an end scenes like these:

    http://farmlandgrab.org/post/view/19307

    http://thefederalist-gary.blogspot.com.au/2011/10/corporations-use-global-warming-to.html

    Namwasa Uganda where land was seized and villages burned by gov’t forces in deals with companies like British New Forest Co to grow forests for carbon credits.

    The World Bank and Gold n’ Sacks are heavily invested in these companies and the Carbon Credit Exchequer.

    The carbon credit exchange scam is throwing people off their land throughout the developing world

    100

    • #
      ExWarmist

      One of many evils perpetrated by the Warmists.

      Perhaps JFC could explain the co-option by Big Finance of the Environmental movement?

      91

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      The carbon credit exchange scam is throwing people off their land throughout the developing world

      And where is the UN, that august body that is so-o-o-o-o concerned with the welfare of everyone on the planet and of which Uganda is a member?

      Dare I put in print where I think they’re hiding their heads while this goes on, with their eyes averted lest they see the evil they’ve spawned?

      I’ve preached that the UN is the real enemy for several years. Does anyone still need more evidence that I’m right?

      40

      • #

        The UN and the world bank are the ones putting together these New Forest land grabs, check the personnel transfers between the three, loans, and banking deals with the carbon markets for the trees that are usually eucalyptus trees that nothing edible will grow under. Thus insuring the indigenous people will not be able to come back even if they wanted to.

        30

  • #
    connolly

    Mate whoever you are (male or female)- the poor, the dissenters and scientists of integrity are forever in your debt. I have been called a denier, flat earther, a dog (compliment) and a rat(more honourable than a corrupt academic) because I read as much as I could and changed my understanding of the catastrophic climate panic. I would be proud to be called a FOIAista!

    161

  • #

    FOIA is our John Galt perhaps?…..

    50

  • #
    Dennis

    Quick do something before Senator Conroy and his boss decide to ban thinking.

    60

    • #
      Bob Malloy

      Just on Conroy, I’m glad I caught a little bit of Aunty last night. Tony Jones took on Kim Williams and was out performed by a wiser, smarter, cool and articulate spokesman against Conroys media clamp down.

      TONY JONES, PRESENTER: Now to our top story: the war that’s erupted over the Government’s proposed new media laws.

      I was joined just a short time ago in the studio by News Limited chief executive Kim Williams.

      Kim Williams, thanks for joining us.

      KIM WILLIAMS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, NEWS LIMITED: It’s a pleasure, Tony.

      TONY JONES: You called for Stephen Conroy’s media reforms to be examined in a “sober and disciplined way”. Is that what the Daily Telegraph was doing this morning?

      KIM WILLIAMS: I think the Daily Telegraph was making a characteristic tabloid point in comparing the actions of despots in a number of different jurisdictions who also have invoked the so-called public interest for restricting media activity.

      It just got better from there as Jones continually spoke over Williams if he thought Williams was scoring points. Williams just remained cool, returned to point and finished his answer.

      111

  • #
    pat

    FOIA might also put a stop to this:

    (CORRECTED) Portugal CO2 consultants look to Brazil as EU scheme stutters
    PAMPLONA, March 12 (Reuters Point Carbon) – Portugal’s economic crisis combined with the collapse in carbon prices has led to the closure of two of the nation’s carbon companies, leaving those that survive to look to emerging markets such as Brazil…
    http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2217725?&ref=searchlist

    EU carbon posts 2nd lowest close after hitting 6-wk low
    LONDON, March 13 (Reuters Point Carbon) – EU carbon prices fell for the fourth consecutive session to hit a six-week low of 3.45 euros on Wednesday after news emerged that Germany remained undecided on whether to back a bill to prop up prices…
    http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2219530

    10

  • #
    pat

    12 March: Globe & Mail, Canada: Margaret Wente: Carbon offsets: B.C.’s looniest green scheme yet? Add to …
    Every public institution is now required to pay $25 a tonne for the carbon dioxide it emits. That’s money that’s no longer available for textbooks, teachers and nursing care…
    Most of this money winds up in the pockets of large private companies, which are paid for not emitting greenhouse gasses they almost certainly wouldn’t have emitted anyway, according to investigations by The Vancouver Sun. Corporate recipients have included Encana, Interfor, Kruger and other companies that already had carbon-reduction projects under way or completed. Millions more have gone to the Nature Conservancy of Canada and aboriginal groups connected to the Great Bear Rainforest; they were paid for not cutting down trees they wouldn’t have been allowed to cut down anyway. The prices are all negotiated by Pacific Carbon Trust, a Crown agency that specializes in voodoo carbon accounting…
    “It’s outrageous what’s going on in the name of carbon offsets,” says Frank Lento, chair of the tiny, cash-strapped Southeast Kootenay school district. Last year, his district was dunned $80,000. “That money is going from our classrooms to corporate boardrooms,” he told me…
    Do any of these shenanigans actually reduce emissions? Probably not. As Cornelis van Kooten, an economics professor at the University of Victoria, told me, “The problem is that you cannot keep track of what exactly is being taken out of the atmosphere or going into the atmosphere.” Nonetheless, these schemes are popular with environmentalists and business. Why? “Money. There’s tonnes of money in this.”
    Carbon-offset schemes have created a lucrative niche for consultants, bureaucrats, accountants and entrepreneurs who, for tidy fees, will help you market credits, set the price, determine how much carbon dioxide you’re subtracting from the planet, and write reports certifying that your program is a brilliant success, even if it’s built on the backs of schoolchildren and sick people.
    B.C.’s carbon-neutral green dream is a multimillion-dollar boondoggle. But that doesn’t mean it will be shut down any time soon…
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/carbon-offsets-bcs-looniest-green-scheme-yet/article9623584/

    30

  • #
    • #
      Roy Hogue

      For a minute there I panicked, I thought it was saving the Polar Bears. ;-)

      More schemes to save what doesn’t need saving — just the thing we need.

      How about solving real problems…maybe…anyone for that?

      30

    • #
      Mark D.

      Facepalm indeed!

      If you actually pay attention to the warmists, they are saying that the arctic polar ice is melting from below via warmer oceans. This stupid idea won’t help one bit.

      On the other hand, wind power doesn’t do what it’s supposed to do either so using that low standard, maybe this nut job will get funding……..

      40

  • #
    justjoshin

    FOIA, you are a hero. The world is in your debt. Can’t wait to see the redacted emails as they are released

    50

  • #
    The Black Adder

    JFC, brother of KFC.
    Employed by the ABC.
    Begot from the GFC.
    Your mum should have used an IUD.

    Your analogy of a Kenyan Birth Certificate, with the release of CG3.0 is pathetic!
    The end is near…
    You have every right to feel threatened by what will come out in the next few days.
    Your job at The Climate Commision may be in jeapordy!
    In ordering xtra popcorn!!

    70

  • #
    NikFromNYC

    (1) The trillions squandered on this hoax would have paid off the preposterously inflated contemporary student loan debt that now prevents a normal economic recovery.

    (2) It is high time to finally address the real and very immediate threat that environmentalists cheer on and the media ignores: antibiotic resistance! As a chemist by training my opinion of how hard it would be to avoid this billion death disaster given recent massive advances in synthetic workflow is that it would be delightfully trivial and automatic, if hoards of unemployed chemists were funded.

    -=NikFromNYC=-, Ph.D. in carbon chemistry (Columbia/Harvard)

    80

    • #
      Geoffrey Cousens

      The Italians have something called “phage” or “fage” treatment.Revolutionary.

      10

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      Nik, have you read much about nano silver compounds and the extent to which bugs can develop resistance to it?

      The talk of the town is that the over-prescription of antibiotics accelerated the evolution of resistance to the same drugs. One argument says that therefore, because it’s difficult to develop good ones, antibiotics should be restricted to hospitals and medico-supervised prescriptions so that antibiotics remain effective for longer. Retain the element of surprise, etc.

      When this argument is applied to nano silver it implies that nano silver compounds currently being used in everything from clothes to vapourisers should be banned from the free market.
      Do you think that’s the best course? Is nano silver exceptional or will bugs beat it eventually too?
      Would your answer change if I told you the Friends of The Earth were the ones most vocally pushing for nano silver to be regulated. ;)

      30

  • #
    Nice One

    Will this movie be better than the others? I heard someone said Mann’s work was crap. Oh no!!

    BTW: You still haven’t answered Jo.

    http://joannenova.com.au/2013/03/has-the-world-started-cooling-hints-from-4-of-5-global-temperature-sets-say-it-might-have/#comment-1252222

    024

    • #
      AndyG55

      “I heard someone said Mann’s work was crap”

      Well… DUH !!!

      30

    • #
      AndyG55

      “I heard someone said Mann’s work was crap”

      Seriously, if you haven’t realised that by now, you have even LESS intelligence that I gave you credit. And that is significantly near ZERO !

      50

    • #
      Nice One

      Are you going to keep replying until you get it right?

      09

      • #
        AndyG55

        No, just until YOU get something right !

        Gunna be a LONG, LONG time !

        40

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Nice One,

        I’ll get it right the first time.

        We’re fed right up to our eyeballs with your BS and need a break. So shut the phk up for a while! Make it a long while! :-(

        80

  • #
  • #

    Thank you, Mr FOIA.

    110

  • #
    Joe V.

    Anyone considering publishing anything, might like to check their diplomatic status with Ecuador first. Tall bloke may have had nothing to hide, but now he’s not the only one. Take care.

    131

  • #
    Dennis

    For the sake of all of our young people please can we achieve global sanity now.

    40

  • #
    John Brookes

    But the important question is, “Will it have lots of catchy phrases that we can quote out of context?”

    “Hide the decline”, “Mike’s Nature trick”….

    841

    • #
      Geoffrey Cousens

      Piss off Brookes,your beaten and washed up.Try to save some dignity and bow out with grace.

      1710

      • #
        John Brookes

        Oooh! I am so frightened…

        428

        • #
          Robert

          Oooh! I am so frightened…

          Well that is obvious by the fact that you are commenting here trying desperately to convince yourself that the unethical and irresponsible behavior of your heroes is acceptable science.

          It is readily apparent you aren’t going to convince anyone here of anything with the poor reasoning you’ve demonstrated in your comments over the months so the only reasonable conclusion we can make is you are trying to convince yourself.

          172

          • #
            SimonV

            Somebody is trying very hard to convince themselves that these stolen emails contain evidence that global warming is not happening. Desperately hard, in fact.

            [ Just the opposite is the reality. You are trying desperately to find evidence that warming is happening. Good luck.] ED

            39

          • #
            Robert

            Thanks ED, Simon is just a troll in a panic because the password was released. So far all he/she has accomplished is to bore us and annoy the mods. Typical.

            80

        • #
          wes george

          Johnny,

          Don’t be frightened. You can wake up from you mental zombie state if you so choose. It’s within your power to think for yourself.

          Over at The Guardian, apparently the groupthink is that there is nothing to CGIII, even though the emails haven’t even been released. M Courtney (@Bishop Hill’s) notes how revealing the warmist lack of interest is…

          Comment after comment of people declaring a complete lack of interest in these emails (at the Guardian.)

          If you believe in the AGW apocalypse you should be interested in the thought processes of the leading scientists who are researching the end of the world.
          If you are sceptical you should be interested in the thought processes of the leading scientists who think they are researching the end of the world.
          Only if you are completely apoathetic should you be disinterested. And then, why comment?

          …could have a field day with the psychology displayed over there.

          The psychology on display is called denial.

          Denial is often associated with a state of shock and grief over the death of someone very close. But in the Warmist case it is a manifestation of cognitive dissonance.

          The Warmists’ denial of the evidence is an involuntary response to protect the apparently deeply emotional and cherished Warmist worldview from scrutiny by the rational aspect of their own personalities. Committed Climate Alarmists refuse to even allow themselves to examine the evidence. The denial mechanism permits otherwise normal individuals to compartmentalise the climate debate so that when the topic comes up, they can flip into a kind of zombie-like trance state in which they are utterly impervious to reason.

          The paradox of psychological denial when it comes to environmental religio-politics is that Warmists are otherwise completely rational people capable of evaluating evidence in other areas of life and responding appropriately.

          For instance, most Warmists can easily drive an automobile in city traffic. Warmists drive like anyone else, they don’t ignore the evidence of on coming traffic or road conditions in lieu of some imaginary world dominated by computer projections of what the traffic conditions might be like. Of course, if they did they’d be dead.

          But once in the full zombie mental state a Warmist deep in denial can not be deprogrammed. Instead, the climate debate just has to navigate around “the walkers” and move on to the living world of mentally functional human beings. And this is exactly what has happened. Slowly, step by step, the global warming boondoggle is being rolled back. Next week even the EU is planning to announce winding much of its tragically expensive and futile climate change abatement programs back.

          No one is going to ever say sorry or admit they were wrong about CAGW. The hardcore zombies will some day shift their denial from the evidence against CAGW to declaring victory, believing that thanks to their good work the “problem of climate change” was “tackled.”

          This is how the planet will be saved.

          93

        • #
          connolly

          Brookes has been booted off WUWT by the long suffering Anthony Watts. I’ll repeat what I posted on there about you Brookes. How dare you abuse decent honest people by calling them scum!

          Anthony
          In regard to Brookes, There is a large servant class of the global warming industry in this country that has waxed arrogant and grown fat on the proceeds of a corrupt and morally bankrupt political class. We have an election in September. And the CAGW gravy train hits the end of the line. The ALP (possibly the most corrupt political machine in the western parliamentary systems) will be trounced in the polls by a constituency that can no longer stomach its lies and corruption. Brookes is typical of the class – going out with all the dignity of a trapped rat
          .”

          135

          • #
            SimonV

            Only 50% of Liberal MPs are deluded enough to believe that climate change is a conspiracy.

            Boiling this down to a “Cranks” v. “everybody else” could leave you amazingly disappointed come September.

            016

            • #
              connolly

              Believe me I will be amazingly elated come September. I am a betting man. What odds are you willing to take?

              10

          • #
            Streetcred

            REPLY: Dear Mr. Brookes. Thanks for illustrating so clearly how academics have become mentally corrupted that politics matters more than truth. For the record, Mr. Brooks is on faculty at the University of Western Australia, the same place that houses conspiracy theory publisher Lewandowsky. Since you think we are all “scum” (even though we are taking the prudent path), after 208 mostly abusive comments here, you are no longer welcome in my home on the Internet, I’m showing you the door. Get out.

            Regards, Anthony Watts.

            jb must be a crack-head to have written what he did … what a deluded goose ! Whilst jb might be “on faculty” at UWA he’s just a shyte-kicker (apologies for the term, Jo).

            100

            • #
              wes george

              Wow. I didn’t know!

              Streetcred, we need links.

              So Johnny is a neo-Marxist academic corrupting the minds of his young charges and Mattb is a lying Greenie pollie posing as an “independent.”

              It’s all starting to make sense now.

              20

          • #
            John Brookes

            Thank God (who I don’t believe in) that I’ve been booted off WTFUWT. What a waste of space that web site is.

            319

            • #
              Streetcred

              No jb … it is you that is the waste of good oxygen. Hopefully you might go the same way here but on second thoughts, Jo probably keeps you here to amuse the rest of us.

              30

            • #
              connolly

              Brookes of course there is no god. And you are the best argument against intelligent design I have ever come across.

              10

      • #
        AndyG55

        Seriously ?

        JB know nothing of dignity or grace.

        He lives in a world of green slime !!

        133

      • #
        Mike Jowsey

        Or, as Anthony Watts puts it:

        John Brookes says:
        March 14, 2013 at 8:16 am

        But please, do publish every little bit. Show people what scum you really are.

        REPLY: Dear Mr. Brookes. Thanks for illustrating so clearly how academics have become mentally corrupted that politics matters more than truth. For the record, Mr. Brooks is on faculty at the University of Western Australia, the same place that houses conspiracy theory publisher Lewandowsky. Since you think we are all “scum” (even though we are taking the prudent path), after 208 mostly abusive comments here, you are no longer welcome in my home on the Internet, I’m showing you the door. Get out.

        Regards, Anthony Watts.

        20

    • #
      Dave

      .
      And this is John Brookes:

      The Master of quoting out of context.

      You have NFI on what you say. Typical non-response from you again.

      155

    • #
      Streetcred

      jb … you left out “Mikes AGU Trick”. There is a name for everyone of the classic cockups by your high priests. Get with it or get out, boy! Already the evidence points to internal wrangling in The Team … Mikey’s full of shit, to paraphrase !

      122

    • #
      Nice One

      My God it’s worse than we feared. Here’s a quote from one of the damming emails.

      Thanks for your message. I’m forwarding this to Ray and Malcolm to reply to some of your statements below,

      415

      • #
        Streetcred

        For your’s and jb’s edification stupid one, an oldie just to set the scene for the future:

        “Hi Keith,

        Of course, I agree with you. We both know the probable flaws in
        Mike’s recon, particularly as it relates to the tropical stuff.
        Your
        response is also why I chose not to read the published version of his
        letter. It would be too aggravating. The only way to deal with this
        whole issue is to show in a detailed study that his estimates are
        clearly deficient in multi-centennial power, something that you
        actually did in your Perspectives piece, even if it was not clearly
        stated because of editorial cuts. It is puzzling to me that a guy as
        bright as Mike would be so unwilling to evaluate his own work a bit
        more objectively.

        Ed”

        Briffa’s reply …

        “Ed

        I have just read this lettter – and I think it is crap. I am sick to death of Mann stating his reconstruction represents the tropical area just because it contains a few (poorly temperature representative ) tropical series. He is just as capable of regressing these data again any other “target” series , such as the increasing trend of self-opinionated verbage he has produced over the last few years , and … (better say no more)
        Keith”

        Ouch ! Suck it up troll !

        223

        • #
          Nice One

          ZMOG. Someone thought Mann was wrong. Oh no!

          And what peer-reviewed journal did they set him right in? And how does it affect the hockeystick, or more importantly, how it refutes other hockeysticks?

          You forgot to add that bit.

          319

          • #
            AndyG55

            “Someone thought Mann was wrong”

            Anyone with even one brain cell KNOWS that Mann wrong !!

            You, on the other hand, don’t fit that category.

            141

          • #
            Nice One

            Andy, you also forgot the bit about providing evidence. Try again.

            118

          • #
            AndyG55

            It is self evident that you don’t fit the category.

            No proof needed.. You are brain dead. !!

            101

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            Nice One blathers on.

            Someone thought Mann was wrong. Oh no!

            It’s commendable that you can keep your sense of humor while your house of cards is about to catch fire. But were I you I’d keep my eyes open and a fire extinguisher handy.

            On the other hand, if you really want to go down with the ship you can follow Captain Smith’s example as the Titanic slipped beneath the waves. He’s probably lonely down there and would welcome your company.

            61

          • #
            Mark

            On the other hand, if you really want to go down with the ship you can follow Captain Smith’s example as the Titanic slipped beneath the waves. He’s probably lonely down there and would welcome your company.

            Jeez Roy, if Captain Smith saw Noisome One approaching, what remains of him would somehow manage to leave the scene.

            30

          • #
            connolly

            The point is that Briffa and Cook privately say that the hockey stick reconstruction is wrong but were too intimidated by the CAGW industry to honesty oppose it in the journals. This is a corruption of science. To understand that you need an ethical framework. You clearly haven’t one. The best way to relate to the morally disabled is to refuse to waste precious moments of life in fruitless discourse. Go away.

            60

        • #
          John Brookes

          So Mann and Briffa disagree? But I thought it was a cabal of climate scientists all working together to bring down western civilisation?

          017

    • #
      Nice One

      Or this groundbreaking news.

      >As rumors often are, the one you heard is not entirely accurate. So, I will
      >take some time here to explain for you, Mike, and others exactly what was
      >done and what the motivation was, in an effort to hopefully avoid any
      >misunderstanding. I especially want to avoid any suggestion that this work
      >was being done to specifically counter or refute the “hockey stick”.

      121

      • #
        AndyG55

        Don’t PANIC, Nonce !!!

        You insignificant, puerile, little git !!

        Jump up and down instead, and stamp your feet….. It’s funnier. !

        105

        • #
          Nice One

          What’s funny is seeing you guys wetting yourself on the hope of some gossip, as if an email is going to change the evidence.

          522

          • #
            AndyG55

            Frankly, I don’t give a hoot what’s in this lot. The AGW meme has been categorically disproven many times over.

            It is a FRAUD and only those on the trough truly pretend to believe it.

            But its fun watching the trough dwellers panicing about what might be in there.

            Watching them see the probabiity of their funds disappearing once the givernment realises they have been CONNED

            (or they run out of our money.. which ever happens first)

            And no, the emails WILL NOT change the evidence. They don’t need to.. AGW has collapsed.

            It is dead, it just doesn’t realise it yet.

            123

          • #
            AndyG55

            Really, Nonce..

            If you are NOT in a panic… why are you here??????????

            You serve no purpose !!

            92

          • #
            Nice One

            When are you going to convince the Artic to stop melting?

            318

          • #
            AndyG55

            roflmao.. The Arctic is currently at the top of the 21st century average ice area..

            DESPERATION , Nonce.. you got nothing !! FOOL !!

            155

          • #
            PeterB in Indianapolis

            The emails already prove that Mann and others repeatedly changed the “evidence” because they really didn’t have any in the first place and had to make stuff up.

            133

          • #
            Robert

            We are still waiting for ANY valid evidence from the warmist camp, hasn’t been any yet. So who needs an email to “change” something you never had in the first place? We’d chip in and get you a clue but I doubt you’d know how to use it.

            91

          • #

            Mrs Nice,

            …. as if an email is going to change the evidence.”

            What evidence?

            241

          • #
            Mattb

            Andy G55 just above: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

            rather than your random graph.

            44

          • #
            JFC

            Oh dear Andy, that’s embarrassing posting that graph. You do realise how foolish that makes you look right? If not, you really do need to do some homework.

            16

          • #
            Catamon

            roflmao.. The Arctic is currently at the top of the 21st century average ice area..

            Actually AngryG55, it seems to be currently nearly 2 SD below the 1979-2000 average. Sooo, that would pretty much mean that the whole of the 21st century maximum ice extent has been historically low compared to the previous 20 years wouldn’t it?

            And that’s before anybody talks about ice volme.

            DESPERATION , Nonce.. you got nothing !! FOOL !!

            Maybe you ought to moderate your language a bit when replying to peoples posts and then you wouldn’t come across as such a pig ignorant tosspot git.

            16

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Will it have lots of catchy phrases that we can quote out of context?

      Welcome to the discussion, John. With you on board no one else will need to take anything out of context. Your off the wall interjections will be quite enough to do the job. Nearly everything you say is out of context.

      Have a nice day though. :-)

      121

    • #

      “Will it have lots of catchy phrases that we can quote out of context?”

      “Hide the decline”, “Mike’s Nature trick”….

      Brooks, anyone can write “it’s out of context”. Go on and explain in what context “using tricks to hide declines” is scientific. And no, a link to Sks will not do. You need to explain it in your own words. If it’s so obvious…

      284

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        In his own words? Jo, don’t be silly! ;-)

        90

      • #
        Eddie Sharpe

        Apologies, for fat finger trouble on those thumbs ups . Context is no excuse for hiding declines, even if it were for some ill conceived ‘greater good’ .

        40

      • #
        Sean McHugh

        Brooks, anyone can write “it’s out of context”. Go on and explain in what context “using tricks to hide declines” is scientific. And no, a link to Sks will not do. You need to explain it in your own words. If it’s so obvious…

        It won’t happen. John Brookes’ capacity for bluster is directly proportional to his capacity for bolting.

        John isn’t that stupid. He would know that the ‘context’ of ‘trick’ is explained in the email. Like plenty of other tricks, its purpose is to ‘hide’ something, something inconvenient. So why does he make out otherwise? It’s a case of anything for the ’cause’, even one’s own credibility.

        40

        • #
          SimonV

          So, what was the “trick” and what did it “hide”?

          [Good question. I'm proud of you for having such a clear thought] [snip] ED

          14

          • #
            ExWarmist

            The nut of the issue was that Briffa’s tree ring data showed late 20th century cooling – aka “the decline”.

            So it was snipped, aka “Hidden”.

            The issue is, as follows.

            Either. (1) The trees are in fact thermometers – and all the other instruments recording late 20th century temperature rises are wrong, and the world was cooling during the late 20th Century OR (2) Trees are not thermometers and the rest of Briffa’s data is useless.

            Neither option was dealt with by the climatologists involved in the hiding the decline.

            A consequence of not “dealing with it” is that the overall lack of professionalism of the climatologists is now on display, and if they can’t chuck out obviously bad (Briffa’s) data, then what does that say wrt the credibility of any of their other results.

            The corruption is at the process layer – think about it.

            40

        • #
          Streetcred

          He’s so dim that Watt’s mistook him for an academic from UWA.

          20

      • #
        John Brookes

        Well, unless this password thingy is made public, I expect everything to be out of context. Cherry picked to within an inch of a law suit.

        Still its going to be entertaining to see the spin.

        412

        • #
          Ian H

          While on the subject of entertainment, I see you’ve just been shown the door by Anthony Watts. In fact he gave you a serious bitch slapping. I personally found that very entertaining.

          41

        • #
          Robert

          Well you must love watching yourself then as between you, Nice One, and our new resident SimonV that’s all any of you have been doing is spin. But we understand that you’ve committed yourself to this and with the enemies you’ve made through your arrogance and ill mannered behavior are clinging dearly to it because without you’re sunk.

          41

        • #
          wes george

          Best. Argument. Ever. for not releasing password – John Brookes recommends password release.

          Duh.

          21

        • #
          Streetcred

          Stop playing with your cherry, jb … it’s unbecoming of a grown man. Youa re a grown man aren’t you ?

          11

      • #
        John Brookes

        I thought “hide the decline” was a reference to tree rings ceasing to be a good proxy for temperature at some point last century, and so the tree ring temps were replaced by directly measured temperatures from that point on. And it was noted in the paper that it was done like that. And about a year later a paper was published discussing why the tree rings ceased to be a good proxy.

        But if its some sort of big cover up, please enlighten me.

        410

        • #
          Ian H

          Actually “hide the decline” was a reference to concealing the fact that tree rings ceased to be a good proxy for temperature at some point last century. Because that might lead people to ask whether they were ever a good proxy for temperature.

          Quacks like a cover-up to me.

          72

        • #
          Sean McHugh

          John Brookes said:

          I thought “hide the decline” was a reference to tree rings ceasing to be a good proxy for temperature at some point last century, and so the tree ring temps were replaced by directly measured temperatures from that point on.

          Weasel words! Yes it was in reference to tree-rings being unreliable but more specifically it was in reference to the author trying to disguise that inconvenient fact, especially given that the plot was heavily based on cherry-picked tree rings.

          And it was noted in the paper that it was done like that. And about a year later a paper was published discussing why the tree rings ceased to be a good proxy.

          So are you telling us that, at the time, it was made obvious the hidden part was deliberately and especially hidden, without an explanation as to why it was hidden? That seems too bizarre to be likely.

          [And about a year later a paper was published discussing why the tree rings ceased to be a good proxy.]

          After a year the Hockey Stick would have done its job. It was the picture that was famous, not a relatively obscure paper that religiously tried to reconcile the obvious unreliability of using tree rings to determine the history of the earth’s temperature.

          But if its some sort of big cover up, please enlighten me.

          Hiding something and covering it up (in the context of your challenge) mean the same thing. So consider yourself ‘enlighten[ed]‘. But of course that’s not going to happen, so consider your porch light on but nobody home.

          71

        • #
          Skiphil

          Fundamentally “hide the decline” is about deleting adverse data without notice or explanation.

          The fact that one or more papers exist where such deletion was noted does NOTHING to excuse all the papers and graphs in which the deletion/substitution of data was not noted.

          http://climateaudit.org/2011/03/15/new-light-on-hide-the-decline/

          Further, what is the basis for ‘belief’ (mere faith, how quaint) that a set of proxies DID reliably track temps pre-thermometer if the sudden appearance of a ‘divergence’ problem throws into question whether said proxies are in fact reliable treemometers?

          There is some assumption and hand-waving that something changed around 1960 so that formerly reliable treemometers are suddenly no longer fit for that purpose. The disgrace of the climate science profession includes not only the unscientific practices of “hide the decline” but the utter lack of serious curiosity about why/how tree proxies should suddenly cease to be useful proxies for temperature. Is it scientific to simply guess/assume that some new factor (we know not what) accounts for the post-1960 failures of tree temp. proxies?? How can this issue not be at the top of the agenda for people in paleo purporting to be scientists and writing papers with this “divergent” data in front of them??

          10

  • #
    Geoffrey Cousens

    I just read this on Climate Realists;it seems surreal,hooray!

    60

  • #
    RoHa

    OT, but what has happemed to Australian Climate Madness? I couldn’t get them at all this morning, and now all I see is something from 2009!

    60

    • #
      AndyG55

      I gather they are in the process of changing server providers.

      This can sometimes take time to organise.

      50

  • #
    Beth cooper

    Supporters of open society owe you a debt of gratitude, FOIA.

    100

  • #
    Speedy

    Dear Mr. FOIA

    Thankyou! Thankyou! Thankyou! You are a hero!

    Best Wishes,

    Speedy

    100

  • #

    [...] still trying to fathom the linguistics of the Climategate III text. The author(s) appears to be overly concerned with linguistics and I quote the first few sentences [...]

    40

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      A very thorough analysis but unfortunately it doesn’t lead to my knowing more about FOIA than I did when I started. He/she has a conscience and may or may not be something else as well. You ask more questions than you answer. That may in the end be a good thing. But we don’t seem to be any closer to who FOIA is.

      60

  • #
    Eddie Sharpe

    The FOIA persona is undoubtedly heroic and a great service has been performed for humanity.
    Until he can be known though, all that is known for sure is the content of the mails so far released and uncontested as being genuine.

    Wholesale release of remaining E-mails, including , however unknowingly, some of only unhealthy, prurient and possibly even harmful public interest would be indefensible.

    Even the anonymous Mr FOIA wasn’t prepared to go so far, overtly.
    Once information , including passcodes, is being communicated by e-mail it is already out there and knowable to many agencies.

    Privacy is a quaint notion, if it ever really existed.

    90

  • #
    AndyG55

    To all CAGW TROLLS, I ask

    “Why are you here if you are NOT in a PANIC!!

    YOU know you can see your edifice collapsing..

    but seriously

    GET A GRIP, you poor little worms. !!

    Your desperation YELLS !!!

    You are SQUIRMING……………… BIG TIME !

    That is why you are here !

    Go back and talk to the slime that is John Cook and Sks.. that is where you belong……on a site based on an alternate science reality.

    172

    • #
      Speedy

      John Cook and Skeptical Science.com. The alternative to reality…

      130

    • #
      John Brookes

      Well done! You successfully controlled your desire to use all caps. There were a couple of times you briefly lost control, but I think a little tweaking of your dose should fix that.

      512

    • #
      AndyG55

      WHY ARE YOU HERE ??

      You serve no purpose. ! Just a waste of space..

      or is that how you choose to live your life, as a waste of space. ?

      41

      • #
        Catamon

        WHY ARE YOU HERE ??

        To give you the heebies. :)

        Really AngryG55, i only come here because of you dont you know?? You give my life purpose and meaning.

        29

  • #
    Eddie Sharpe

    A good interview with Lord Monckton, looking very relaxed & content after his time in WA and just before the news of CG3 came out.
    4BC Drive

    90

  • #
    observa

    I know catastrophists and watermelons everywhere will join we freedom loving skeptics here and everywhere in joyous celebration of these whistleblowing Wickedleaks.
    We are all as one now- Publish and be damned?

    90

  • #
    Mark Hladik

    I think it is intuitively obvious that FOIA is actually a member of the fairer sex.

    They’re the only ones with the cajones in the 21st Century.

    Witness Jo!

    60

  • #
    Bob B

    Jo,

    Is this the John Brooks that posts here? If so I am amazed how the far left have destroyed the scientific method at universities:

    John Brookes says:
    March 14, 2013 at 8:16 am
    But please, do publish every little bit. Show people what scum you really are.

    REPLY: Dear Mr. Brookes. Thanks for illustrating so clearly how academics have become mentally corrupted that politics matters more than truth. For the record, Mr. Brooks is on faculty at the University of Western Australia, the same place that houses conspiracy theory publisher Lewandowsky. Since you think we are all “scum” (even though we are taking the prudent path), after 208 mostly abusive comments here, you are no longer welcome in my home on the Internet, I’m showing you the door. Get out.

    Regards, Anthony Watts.

    320

    • #
      Robert

      <sigh> It has become apparent that abusive comments are the lefts idea of “evidence.” Given that their belief in the “evidence” is directly proportional to the quantity of their slurs, innuendos, name calling, etc. it is no wonder they believe there is so much “evidence.”

      This can be born out by the simple fact that whenever they are asked to provide said “evidence” all we get is slurs, innuendos, and more name calling…

      110

      • #
        Warren

        Well,Anthony is lying when he claims John’s comment’s are mainly abusive. Good to be out of Ants house,JB,it needs an airing.

        01

    • #
      Mark D.

      Bob B, that sure sounds like our John Brookes. Anthony W. seems like a very patient person to me. J.B. should take a hint.

      and poor John, is he going to lose that stipend he receives based on warmist words typed at skeptic sites?

      110

    • #
      jaymam

      Yes it is the same John Brookes. The photo he uses here is on the Facebook page that his name on WUWT links to.

      50

    • #
      John Brookes

      Yeah, thats me. And yes, some “skeptical” behaviour is scummy. Like Mr Watts getting it wrong and calling me an academic when I’m just an admin. I think he’s got a chip on his shoulder.

      321

      • #
        Robert

        Are you on faculty? If so you should know what an academic is and that just being an “admin” doesn’t change whether you are or are not an academic. But we realize your nose is still stinging from getting the boot so we’ll let you slide on that one. You sure love your spin don’t you?

        According to UWA’s directory:

        Mr John Brookes
        First-year Physics Unit Coordinator
        Academic Staff (Physics)

        Academic staff… What is the operative word there John? Give you a hint, to help you out I put it in bold.

        So John, either you are a liar or UWA needs to correct it’s directory.

        110

      • #
        Sugarplumfairy

        Well John,

        Compared to Watts you are an academic.

        I think he’s got a chip on his shoulder.

        I think Anthony is well balanced: he has a chip on both shoulders.

        And whatever happened to the groundbreaking Surfacestations project? Looks like it disappeared faster than Arctic Sea Ice.

        613

        • #
          old44

          I believe the collection of data for the Surfacestations project has been completed and a paper is in the process of being published. These things take time, it is not like a warmists theory, it has to be accurate.

          111

        • #
          Sean McHugh

          Sugarplumfairy said:

          I think Anthony is well balanced: he has a chip on both shoulders.

          Better than shouldering a chump.

          30

      • #
        Peter Miller

        John

        The time proven definition of a socialist is someone who has a chip on each shoulder: One of spite and one of envy.

        That doesn’t sound like Anthony Watts to me.

        40

      • #
        wayne, s. Job

        Mr Watts is a gentleman of the old school, very tolerant and very patient. He allows every one to have a view and an opinion. He draws the line at abuse and cussing. John, if you had put points of scientific value or even a considered opinion about the scientific validity of what was being debated you would have no trouble for it is the premier scientific site for climatology.

        Putting in your supercilious little barbs as is your modus operandi and then making a complete dick of yourself tends to cause one to run out of patience. Your stupidity knows no bounds, you got what you deserved, take heed and discuss threads in a proper manner.

        71

        • #
          John Brookes

          Oh come on. Watts pretends to be reasonable, but is so totally biased that it is not funny. That he still goes on about the temperature record is ludicrous, especially given the BEST results. But if you wish to get away with that sort of behaviour, being an old style gentleman will help.

          311

          • #
            Sean McHugh

            So please explain the independence of the BEST results. BEST depends on the same dodgy data as the others. You did know that didn’t you, John? The only independent data come from the UAH and RSS satellites, and they say BEST is the worst.

            I heard Flannery the other night saying that it’s a mistake to say the temperature has been flat for 16 years, because there is supposedly heat deep in the oceans (they’re still looking for it). In other words, he is implying concession that the land-based temperature readings haven’t warmed over that period. BEST only deals with the land-based temperatures and is an outlier to the all the other adjusted determinations. Therefore, rather than being the gold standard, it is the first one that should be rejected.

            70

            • #
              John Brookes

              BEST answered one of the “skeptics” bleats about the human factor in fixing the data. There are many problems with the original data, and for the other temperature records, people made judgements about how to handle these. BEST decided to create a set of rules that ended up giving more weight to reliable data and less to that deemed (by the rules) to be less reliable. So there were no nasty climate scientists involved.

              The results were the same as when people did it, confirming that the existing methods had been just fine.

              310

              • #
                Sean McHugh

                The results were the same as when people did it, confirming that the existing methods had been just fine.

                Fine, then if there is that agreement, there must be agreement that there has been no significant warming for well over a decade.

                And by the way, that doesn’t mean I trust Muller more than his mates. His false claim of having been one of the unwashed sceptics is sufficient to show he is a phony.

                01

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Like Mr Watts getting it wrong and calling me an academic when I’m just an admin.

        Either way, John, the point is that you are unpopular and getting more so by the day. If you can’t read the handwriting on the wall then at least read it when it’s spelled out in plain English. You don’t contribute anything useful to the global warming debate.

        You can’t argue convincingly for the side you favor.

        You can’t argue convincingly against the side you oppose.

        That makes you just a noise level irritant to everyone with a serious intent. In that situation I would go away and stay away out of embarrassment if for no other reason. And what about common courtesy? :-(

        40

        • #
          Robert

          And what about common courtesy?

          The left has none, they don’t even understand the meaning of the phrase. They will behave in such a manner that if ANYONE responds to them in kind they whine about abuse, attacks, etc. never once considering that they are receiving that which they have been handing out and with the shoe on the other foot don’t like it.

          The following is an excerpt from The Notebooks of Lazarus Long as written by Robert A. Heinlein:

          Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untraveled, the naive, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as “empty,” “meaningless,” or “dishonest,” and scorn to use them. No matter how “pure” their motives, they thereby throw sand into machinery that does not work too well at best.

          It seems a fairly accurate assessment of those on the left as the bulk of them, the “useful fools” if you will, are quite naive. So far based on his comments here John is either naive or quite stupid, not worth the time to figure out which.

          40

          • #
            Mark D.

            Another excellent post Robert. The Left has done this even worse by creating stupid laws like anti-bullying etc. to make up for the lack of lubricant. Trouble is, the machinery still needs to avoid excessive wear and these laws do not help that in any way.

            John is either naive or quite stupid, not worth the time to figure out which.

            There is the possibility; that he is too stupid to know how naive he is.

            30

  • #
    Rod Stuart

    There is already lots of info condemning Mann that should be useful to Dr. Tim Ball.
    Nice one ought to take a peek at Climate Depot.
    Marcott has admitted his “hockey stick” is another turd.
    Arctic sea ice growth is at an all time high and has blown away the previous record for ice growth by a half million kilometers.

    81

  • #
    Linde

    Meanwhile, back in the Commissariat, we will observe the nutcracker effect of the hockeystick over the next week or so. The flaming AGW nutters will get the crunch. The lowprifile nutjobs will probably remain embedded till The Party gives them the new codeword.

    30

  • #
    Dennis

    What’s their next Agenda?

    40

  • #
    pat

    World Bank eyes global CO2 market as EU scheme stutters
    WASHINGTON, March 14 (Reuters Point Carbon) — The World Bank has mobilized up to $110 million to help developing countries launch carbon markets that cap emissions and allow companies to trade permits in an attempt to build a global trading scheme
    http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2222089?&ref=searchlist

    EU 2030 emissions goal to force CO2 prices higher: analysts
    LONDON, March 14 (Reuters Point Carbon) – An EU goal to cut greenhouse emissions 40 percent by 2030 will force industry and power stations to vastly increase their efforts to cut emissions after 2020, forcing carbon prices under Europe’s Emissions Trading Scheme to rise later this decade, analysts said Thursday…
    http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2221693?&ref=searchlist

    Demand for carbon offsets crashes at Britain’s Co-op Group
    LONDON, March 14 (Reuters Point Carbon) – Carbon credit demand from Britain’s Co-operative Group, one of the country’s largest corporate buyers of non-U.N. credits, almost halved last year as the company switched focus to improving energy efficiency at its operations as opposed to offsetting its emissions, a company spokesman said…
    http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2222093?&ref=searchlist

    20

  • #
    pat

    “free market” shenanigans continued:

    15 March: Bloomberg: Ewa Krukowska: EU Carbon Fix in Energy Report Survives Rejection Attempt
    The European Parliament upheld by a margin of three votes a non-binding recommendation for regulators to tackle oversupply of carbon permits in the world’s biggest market.
    Carbon prices surged as much as 20 percent after members of the Parliament voted 292 to 289 with 32 abstentions today to keep a reference to a carbon-market intervention in the assembly’s report on the European Union’s energy policy through 2050. The decision came before the 754-seat assembly’s vote scheduled for April 16 on a separate measure drafted by the European Commission that would enable delaying auctions of some carbon allowances to reduce a record glut in the market that pushed prices to all-time lows…
    “Today’s ballot confirms just how tight the April vote is likely to be,” said Itamar Orlandi, an analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance in London. “The margin of only three votes can easily be tipped given 173 members have not expressed their opinion because of abstentions or absence. That is far too narrow for backloading proponents to be comfortable.”…
    EU carbon permits for delivery in December rose to as high as 4.23 euros and were up 7.7 percent at 3.79 euros on the ICE Futures Europe exchange as of 4:39 p.m. in London…
    While there are more supporters than opponents of backloading among member, the backing is short of 255 out of 345 votes needed for the measure to pass as several nations, including Germany, remain undecided…
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-14/eu-carbon-fix-in-energy-report-survives-rejection-attempt-1-.html

    10

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Over supply of carbon permits…the poor bastards don’t understand what their problem is. The thing is one big sick joke!

      The whole world is on drugs with their brains fried like liver in a frying pan.

      :-( :-( :-( :-( ………… :-( :-( :-( :-(

      20

  • #
    normalnew

    We have a situation where good people are held hostage to very bad ideas, and I for one think we should honor the goodness in man and let actions be questions for the law. Where everyone else is let free. Manipulation can happen to us all.

    20

  • #
    Buffalo Soldier

    I just wish those pathetic glasses the P.M started wearing had fell off in India. I don’t need this fancy Mr FOIA. I need some REAL F’kn radical HERO’s from the american science fiction television drama series created by Tim Kring that garnered a number of awards and nominations.

    06

    • #
      Eddie Sharpe

      The glasses were a vast improvement. I don’t know where this fashion fad for ladies with old man glasses came from, but there’s no reason the PM shouldn’t indulge too.

      30

      • #
        Buffalo Soldier

        We have experts on everything here like Eddie that sound like there sort of scientific but haven’t gotten anywhere and often make up all this stuff without knowing what it means to know something. Buffalo Soldier has the facts, the hard science, the rigorous measurements, the money back guarantee!

        02

    • #
      Tony Blunt

      No comic book hero Mr. FOIA.
      Is it any wonder that so many affluent Westerners can be so easily deluded when their life experience comes from The Movies & Comics (in which I’d have to include much of the MSM).

      10

      • #
        Buffalo Soldier

        At the height of my previous comments I considered movies to be documentaries and my unique avatar on the left of me to be a wedge tailed eagle.

        00

  • #
    Ace

    All this blather over a few thousand parsquit e-mails is getting on my monkeys.

    Get this….IT DOESNT MATTER SQUAT WHAT THEY SAY………..if Mann stood at the Washington monument with a 210.000 watt PA and roundly declared his renunciation of AGW, it wouldnt make a damn bit of difference. Theyd stick himinthe booby-hatch and continue regardless. There are too many vested interests and lifestyle commitments to the AGW bandwagon to stop it now.

    All we can do is wait until, like any out of control loco, it crashes killing vast numbers of people. This phase of history can and will only end in bloodshed.Trying to stop it by talking about it is like a 1930s Jehovas witness trying to stop Hitler by door-to-door canvassing.

    Thats my mood now. Tomorrow I may change my mind. Mass-debating can be fun.

    121

    • #
      john robertson

      Ace sadly I agree.
      The Popes response to his general in southern France, circa 1300AD, fits my feelings toward all of the cult.
      Hopefully we are both wrong, remember the master plan seems to have overlooked the internet and appears to have hinged on controlling the message.

      Those who obsess for power over all, are both crazy and stupid.
      Sane persons run from such responsibility.

      41

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        Those who obsess for power over all, are both crazy and stupid.
        Sane persons run from such responsibility.

        Indeed that is what we must do. But it’s damned hard to not wish for the power to set things straight.

        00

  • #
    old44

    A statue needs to be erected to the unknown leaker, any suggestions on what it should look like?

    10

  • #
  • #

    Getting a bit silly you lot. Get back to the science (and political) discussion at hand. Has FOIA given us anything new?. I agree with those that say previous revelations basically cooked their goose in any rational sense but this is starting to look a bit Channel 4 to me. We need facts, dates and names. We need a tidal wave of reason to defeat the agenda of the fake science moguls and their buddies in the MSM and the unholy Green/Labour mafia.

    40

  • #
    Bevan

    May I suggest that we all avoid trying to track down the identity of Mr FIFO, the relevant Web site/email address or the password. We have seen what has happened to Bradley Manning and Julian Assange who were motivated, at least in part, by the same concern for the population at large. There is going to be plenty to do trying to link up the various emails in all three sets of these leaks as they come available.
    Let us all concentrate on that task and give up the pointless denegration of those of a different mind to ourselves.
    Remember Mark Twain’s comment: never argue with a fool, onlookers might not be able to tell the difference.

    31

  • #
    Bevan

    Yes, I see it now. It should be Mr FOIA not FIFO. Fly In Fly Out must give away my location :-)

    21

  • #
    radikalek

    From the various blogs I cannot figure out whether the Mr. FOIA announces the release of a new set of files, or merely disclosed the password needed to access the 2.0 set (from 2011).

    The amount of files (220k) points to the latter, yet the old directory contains messages dated 2012-Sep-10.

    Clearing up this confusion will be much appreciated.
    Thanks!

    20

  • #
    Combover Soul

    I tend to shy away from reading the comments that are one big monolithic, indentation, gap-free block.

    Still, it’s all a breath of fresh air when you live in the independent-thinking-walks-the-plank Northern Rivers. Al Gore, Pol Pot, and that Flannery dude with the fake, “I’m so into bush” hat are right up there with Vishnu round here.. . . . . .

    00

    • #

      Combover, how does a defined paragraph make an opinion more pertinent. I could answer by saying that many with not much to say and too many paragraphs to say it in are verbose. Blogs should be concise whenever possible otherwise we start sounding like politicians and we can’t have that.

      10

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        But then, in a way we all are politicians. Such is the stuff of daily life. It’s how we get along with avoid killing each other. :-)

        It’s the stuffed shirt, phony politics I don’t like.

        00

  • #
    Eliza

    Actually the big story is the Marcott paper fraud or “made up” hockey stick. see Mcyntire etc… Its quite likely that with the publication of this complete drivel paper, FOIA saw it as an opportune moment. Methinks this paper will have to be withdrawn by Science and hopefully then, it will be the total demise of the team.

    120

    • #
      John Brookes

      So the word has gone out to “skeptics” to attack Marcott?

      014

      • #

        Why are we “skeptics” in inverted commas’ John?. Wishful thinking?.

        61

      • #
        Ian H

        If Marcott is good science it will be able to withstand any attack. However it isn’t and it won’t.

        101

      • #
        JunkPsychology

        Well, the word has definitely gone out to Brookes to attack anyone who criticizes Marcott.

        How does Brookes propose to explain the discrepancy between Marcott’s dissertation and the published article?

        80

    • #
      Barry Woods

      I agree.. the Marcott Hockey stick is far more important and CURRENT than climategate 3 (in my opinion), and I have the password. (helping out search through – some things of interest, most picked up in CG1 and Cg2, I think)

      100

      • #
        Andrew McRae

        Heh, you’re right there. Why do we want to trawl through 220,000 emails looking for possible signs of fraud when a current example is staring us in the face?

        I guess in an odd kind of way it would help climate science if it could be shown pressure came from the top in the bureaucracy to publish politically correct results.
        Plus the more double-standards, fake consensus, false confidence, and downright fraud that can be found, the easier it will be to cancel our carbon tax. Politicians don’t have a clue about the science angle, but they do understand fraud and deception.

        60

  • #
    Stephen Richards

    John Brookes

    March 15, 2013 at 10:34 pm · Reply

    So the word has gone out to “skeptics” to attack Marcott?

    Jo, you should ban this pillock. Brookes, the attack is on crap, fraudulant science. On criminals who kill by their deceit and lies.

    Anthony has banned him having lost patience with his trolling.

    80

    • #

      Banning should be an absolute last resort, free speech and all that. We must practice what we preach. We may disagree with him but I can’t ever remember a time where he was abusive or overly rude.

      52

      • #
        Streetcred

        I’m not so sure in jb’s case … it’s ok to have a considered opinion and be wrong but jb just just parrots the lunch table chatter … he doesn’t know, so I’m not sure that his drivel qualifies as “free speech”.

        40

    • #

      The thing is John Brookes is a real name and a real person. That puts him a class above the trolls without the honesty or conviction to connect their real life with their supposedly “passionate” views.

      He says the things we can’t even think of. That’s useful, even if it doesn’t seem like it at the time.

      10

    • #
      Backslider

      What fun is there if we ban all the trolls?

      Do you really want this blog to be like SkS?

      00

  • #
    Combover Soul

    ceetee

    it wasn’t about pertinence, but about readability. Like when someone emails you all in capitals it feels like they’re shouting at you.
    a big blob of text feels like someone talking really fast. At you.

    Anyway, a fair bit of all this is self-promotional smartypants stuff. Dudes pecking intensely at keyboards, getting a wee high off their own pithy comebacks.

    00

  • #
    radikalek

    The email, purportedly containing the password, was sent to some dozen recipients. Why would all recipients, i.e. those who published the email, choose an identical substitution (“redacted” in square brackets) for the alleged password?
    Only Steve McIntyre used [deracted] (which could well be a pun on those who failed to notice).

    Had there been a password at that particular location in (the body of) the message, wouldn’t it have been “redacted” in various ways?

    10

  • #
    Patrick

    Any news or snippets from the 3rd stack of emails?

    I know there were for the first and 2nd stack.

    cheers
    Patrick

    10