Subscriptions, Current Issue & Back Issues

Current Issue | Annual Subscriptions | Back Issues

HACKED EMAILS REVEAL CLIMATE CHANGE HAS BEEN FAKED [updated]

Epoch Times

Climate change scientists have been manipulating and fixing data according to bloggers that are spreading information contained in hundreds of hacked emails.

Bloggers say the 62 mb worth of emails were hacked from the Climate Research Unit, part of Britain’s University of East Anglia and released onto the Internet. The file containing the emails were packaged and posted on blogs by an anonymous hacker.

“We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps,” said the hacker on the climate skeptic site Air Vent on Friday. “We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and document.”

The file contained data, code, and emails from Phil Jones, director of Britain’s leading Climate Research Unit (CRU), to and from many people. Jones confirmed to Investigate magazine’s TGIF Edition Friday night that his organization had been hacked.

“It was a hacker,” Jones told TGIF. “We were aware of this about three or four days ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads of data files and emails.”

The blog “Watts up with that” said they had seen the file and it appeared to be genuine. “Others who have seen it concur—it appears genuine. There are so many files it appears unlikely that it is a hoax. The effort would be too great.”

The “No consensus” blog apparently had the files sent to their site as well..

“This is the biggest news ever broken here,” said the blog. “The first thing I have to say is that I have no connection to the source of these files. It was left as a link on my blog while I was hunting for cloaked deers (fruitlessly) in the Upper Peninsula. These files are real [in my opinion] but they cannot be one hundred percent verified as such.”

The emails are uploaded on a site called “an elegant chaos.”

In one email, scientists appear to admit they can’t find the data to back up their global warming theory.

“Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record. We had 4 inches of snow. The high the last 2 days was below 30F and the normal is 69F, and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F. The low was about 18F and also a record low, well below the previous record low.

“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more
warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.”

Another email thread talks about manipulating data. It is apparently from Phil Jones.

“Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or first thing tomorrow. I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from
1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline. Mike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.”

Another email talks of the potential to excluding some research contrary to the global warming theory.

“The other paper by MM is just garbage – as you knew. De Freitas again. Pielke is also losing all credibility as well by replying to the mad Finn as well – frequently as I see it. I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. K and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”

Comments are closed.