Skip to comments.Breaking: Hackers Infiltrate World's Leading Climate Research Unit (Panic)
Posted on 11/20/2009 8:24:27 AM PST by Red Badger
The email system of one of the world's leading climate researchers was just reported to be infiltrated by hackers. Protected information and email messages sent from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) began turning up on public websites today. Why the CRU was targeted is still unclear--though there's speculation that with the global climate meeting in Copenhagen nearing, opponents of climate action may be going so far as to be doing illegal reconnaissance.
The CRU is perhaps the leading authority on human-caused climate change--they played a key role in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Fourth Assessment Report. Which is perhaps the most respected, well-researched, and authoritative report currently available on climate change.
According to the BBC, "A university spokesman confirmed the [CRU's] email system had been hacked and that information was taken and published without permission." An investigation has begun, and the police have been notified. There's also an internal investigation underway.
As of now, there are only theories as to why the attack was carried out. But many point to the increasing tensions between climate change deniers and scientists in the lead up to COP15 at Copenhagen. The BBC reports that "Graham Cluley, a computer security expert, suggested that December's key climate summit in Copenhagen, which has made headlines around the world, could have increased the university's profile as a possible target among hackers." Which is certainly likely--there's no doubt that intensity is rising around the debate:
"There are passionate opinions on both sides of the climate debate and there will be people trying to knock down the other side," Mr Cluley, senior technology consultant for Sophos, told BBC News. "If they feel that they can gather inside information on what the other side is up to, then they may feel that is ammunition for their counterargument."
Plenty of facts remain to emerge before we go spinning our climate change denier conspiracy theories, so stay tuned--things could get interesting.
“From: Phil Jones
Mike, Ray and Malcolm,
The skeptics seem to be building up a head of steam here ! Maybe we can use this to our advantage to get the series updated !
Odd idea to update the proxies with satellite estimates of the lower troposphere rather than surface data !. Odder still that they dont realise that Moberg et al used the Jones and Moberg updated series !
Francis Zwiers is till onside. He said that PC1s produce hockey sticks. He stressed that the late 20th century is the warmest of the millennium, but Regaldo didnt bother with that. Also ignored Francis comment about all the other series looking similar to MBH.
The IPCC comes in for a lot of stick.
Leave it to you to delete as appropriate !
PS Im getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data.
Dont any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act !”
I bet they find mucho evidence that Al Gore is a big, fat phony!
Hope they revoke his Nobel Prize and give it to that Burmese woman.
Further at web sites Climate Audit and Watts Up With That.
This is typical of how bias creeps into supposedly factual news -- compare "climate change deniers" vs "scientist", as if those who disagree with the global warming alarmists are just deniers and are not scientists.
This has gone viral...............
Why does the song “Let the Bodies Hit the Floor” keep playing in my head?
I read a Russian hacked them and then put it up on Pirate Bay...IOW it is now a torrent download
That a Russian hacked/sabotaged these climate-liars is great. Americans are too chicken to do it + probably prosecutable by 0bama’s thought police
DO YOU DENY THE CLIMATE CHANGE?!?!?!?!?!............
In other news ...
Al Gore could become worlds first carbon billionaire
Al Gore, the former US vice president, could become the worlds first carbon billionaire after investing heavily in green energy companies.
The Real Climate Change Catastrophe
Written by TheDailyBell.com
Monday, 26 October 2009
In 1988, a handful of the scientists who passionately believed in this theory won authorization from the UN to set up the body known as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This was the year when the scare over global warming really exploded into the headlines, thanks above all to the carefully staged testimony given to a US Senate Committee by Dr James Hansen, head of NASAs Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), also already an advocate for the theory that (CO2) was causing potentially catastrophic warming.
One of the more startling features of the IPCC is just how few scientists have been centrally involved in guiding its findings. They have mainly been British and American, led for a long time by Dr. Houghton (knighted in 1991) as chairman of its scientific working group, who in 1990 founded the Met Offices Hadley Centre for research into climate change. The centre has continued to play a central role in selecting the IPCCs contributors to this day, and along with the Climate Research Unit run by Professor Philip Jones at the University of East Anglia, controls HadCrut, one of the four official sources of global temperature data (another of the four, GIStemp, is run by the equally committed Dr. Hansen and his British-born right-hand man, Dr. Gavin Schmidt).
Merkel, Sarkozy back Danes in last-minute climate diplomacy
Published: Friday 20 November 2009
Recently, the Danes again insisted that a deal is still doable in Copenhagen. Our objective is to achieve one agreement with two purposes, Rasmussen said, the first being to provide political guidance for UN negotiations on the new legal framework, and the second to adopt a binding political agreement that would enter into force immediately and hence provide for immediate action to combat climate change.
In the meantime, scepticism is mounting across the Atlantic. Trapped between international pressure to curb greenhouse gas emissions and a US Senate that is not prepared to act, the White House is coy about President Obamas plans.
Sources in Washington point out that Obama could go to Copenhagen after having picked up his Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo on 10 December. Im not sure theres anything you get out of it, said a senior Senate Democratic aide. With nothing to report, inaction and gridlock in the Senate, it seems like a wiser move to stay home, one US senator told Washington-based online news portal Politico.
According to Politico, the Republicans are eager to depict a do-nothing climate conference as another loss for Obama in Copenhagen. The president has come home empty-handed from Copenhagen before, when he flew to the Danish capital to help his hometown of Chicago lobby for the 2016 Olympic Games.
It appeared from a Russian server, but that doesn’t mean it did come from there............
I emailed the first posting about this all over my address book and hope everybody else does the same.
Which just proves the old axiom: FOLLOW THE MONEY!
Yup this is clearly biased but from a site called treehugger.com I sure don't expect "factual" news. I'm still waiting to see if the American lame stream media picks this up. I'm not even sure if Drudge has a link to the story. I couldn't find one this morning anyway.
To: Caspar Ammann
Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: draft
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 12:35:34 -0400 Cc: Tim Osborn , Malcolm Hughes , Keith Briffa , firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, Scott Rutherford , Tom Wigley , firstname.lastname@example.org, Kevin Trenberth thanks Caspar,
I agree--its important to emphasize this point, and I'm glad you recognized that we were underplaying it... mike At 10:25 AM 10/14/2003 -0600, Caspar Ammann wrote:
looks good to me. It is one of these points where they can persuade journalists that they are 'correct' and it actually got into newspapers and finally to the senate floor this way. The more we are able to explain why the first half of the 20th century warmed up naturally, the more confidence we get on the detection of the anthropogenic signal afterwards. Caspar
Michael E. Mann wrote:
Dear All, In response to Caspar's suggestion, which I agree with, I propose rephrasing item "2" as follows: 2) The statement by S03 that the Mann and Jones  reconstruction "clearly shows temperatures in the MWP that are as high as those in the 20th century" is misleading if not false. M03 emphasize that it is the late, and not the early or mid 20th century warmth, that is outside the range of past variability. Mann and Jones emphasize conclusions for the Northern Hemisphere, noting that those for the Southern Hemisphere (and globe) are indeterminate due to a paucity of southern hemisphere data. Consistent with M03, they conclude that, late 20th century Northern Hemisphere mean temperatures are anomalous in a long-term (nearly two millennium) context. Any comments? Thanks, mike
Delivered-To: email@example.com Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:18:37 -0600 From: Caspar Ammann  Organization: NCAR User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: "Michael E. Mann"  Subject: Re: draft
it now looks good to me indeed including the new last paragraph following Tom's wording. The only point I would highlight a little more is in point 2): Maybe it could be stated that the early part of the 20th century is within the natural range whereas the late 20th century, the main point of the AGU position statement and also in M03, is clearly outside. Please also add a second 'n' in my name... Cheers, and thanks for your momentum on this, Caspar Michael E. Mann wrote:
I agree with each of Tom W's suggestions. Adopting them, by the way, brings us down to 738 words. So pending any revised language from Keith/Malcolm in response to Michael O's comment on paragraph 2, I'm putting out a last call for comments, sign-ons, etc... Thanks, mike
At 08:00 AM 10/14/2003 -0600, Tom Wigley wrote:
Some minor points .... para. 2 -- should it be 'an' ensuing rather than 'the' ensuing? para. 2 -- I still think 'each' (line 3) is unnecessary para. 4 -- no comma after '(and globe)' re boreholes, does the point about comparing late 20th century with a 'much longer period' 1000 years ago help us? Given that the 1000 years ago data is highly lowpass filtered, if one *did* have a series with a temporal resolution that allowed a legitimate comparison, then the likelihood of a warmer interval 1000 years ago must be higher. In any event, the time scale issue will not be meaningful to most readers. The key point is the data reliability/uncertainty. I would just say something like ... ".... taken into account. For times more than 500 years ago, uncertainties in the borehole reconstructions preclude any useful quantitative comparison." Finally, I would like the last para. retained, but I suggest shorter wording as ... ".... as indicating that SB03 misinterpreted and misrepresented the paleoclimatological literature. The controversy ....". My problem here is twofold. First, they really say nothing directly about 'mainstream scientific opinion' (except that they clearly disagree with it). At issue is not the mainstream opinion, but their interpretation of the literature and their illogical conclusions. Second, they may have misrepresented the results of their work, but we do not address this issue so it comes here as a non sequitur. In fact, just what such 'misrepresentation' consists of, and why it might be judged as 'misrepresentation' is a subtle issue. Hence my revision -- which retains the word 'misrepresentation', but in a different context. Tom.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++== Michael E. Mann wrote:
Thanks Tim and Malcolm, The latest round of suggestions were extremely helpful. I've accepted them w/ a few minor tweaks (attached). We're at 765 words--I think AGU will let us get away w/ that... So, comments from others? Thanks, mike At 02:11 PM 10/14/2003 +0100, Tim Osborn wrote: SO3 argue that borehole data provide a conflicting view of past temperature histories. To the contrary, the borehole estimates for recent centuries shown in M03 may be consistent with other estimates, provided consideration is given to statistical uncertainties, spatial sampling and possible influences on the ground surface [e.g., snow cover changes--Beltrami and Kellman, 2003]. It is not meaningful to compare the late 20th century with a much longer period 1000 years ago [Bradley et al., 2003], especially given the acknowledged limitations [Pollack et al., 1998] of borehole data.
______________________________________________________________ Professor Michael E. Mann Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22903 _______________________________________________________________________ e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137 http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml ______________________________________________________________ Professor Michael E. Mann Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22903 _______________________________________________________________________ e-mail: email@example.com Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137 http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml -- Caspar M. Ammann National Center for Atmospheric Research Climate and Global Dynamics Division - Paleoclimatology Advanced Study Program 1850 Table Mesa Drive Boulder, CO 80307-3000 email: firstname.lastname@example.org tel: 303-497-1705 fax: 303-497-1348 ______________________________________________________________ Professor Michael E. Mann Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22903 _______________________________________________________________________ e-mail: email@example.com Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137 http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml -- Caspar M. Ammann National Center for Atmospheric Research Climate and Global Dynamics Division - Paleoclimatology Advanced Study Program 1850 Table Mesa Drive Boulder, CO 80307-3000 email: firstname.lastname@example.org tel: 303-497-1705 fax: 303-497-1348 ______________________________________________________________ Professor Michael E. Mann Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22903 _______________________________________________________________________ e-mail: email@example.com Phone: (434) 924-7770 FAX: (434) 982-2137 http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml References 1. mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org 2. mailto:email@example.com 3. mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org 4. mailto:email@example.com 5. http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml 6. mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org 7. http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml 8. mailto:email@example.com 9. mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org 10. http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml 11. mailto:email@example.com 12. http://www.evsc.virginia.edu/faculty/people/mann.shtml
2nd old axiom: When they say it’s not about the money, IT’S ABOUT THE MONEY!
These people know nothing...except on how to scam governments out of money.