Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Scientists in Climate-Gate Scandal Hid Data



January 28, 2010 – Comments (8)

Scientists in Climate-Gate Scandal Hid Data

The university at the center of the climate change scandal over stolen e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public scrutiny.

The University of East Anglia breached Britain's Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming.

The Information Commissioner's Office decided that UEA failed in its duties under the act but said that it could not prosecute those involved because the complaint was made too late, The Times of London has learned. The ICO is now seeking to change the law to allow prosecutions if a complaint is made more than six months after a breach.

The stolen e-mails, revealed on the eve of the Copenhagen summit, showed how the university's Climatic Research Unit attempted to thwart requests for scientific data and other information, and suggest that senior figures at the university were involved in decisions to refuse the requests. It is not known who stole the e-mails.

Professor Phil Jones, the unit's director, stood down while an inquiry took place. The ICO's decision could make it difficult for him to resume his post.

Details of the breach emerged the day after John Beddington, the Chief Scientific Adviser, warned that there was an urgent need for more honesty about the uncertainty of some predictions. His intervention followed admissions from scientists that the rate of glacial melt in the Himalayas had been grossly exaggerated.

In one e-mail, Professor Jones asked a colleague to delete e-mails relating to the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Continue reading at The Times of London


8 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On January 28, 2010 at 10:18 AM, dudemonkey (49.29) wrote:

I've given this topic a lot of thought, and I think what we're seeing is the curtain pulled back on the scientific process.  What we're seeing is that the academic world is at least as full of pettyness and politicking as any other industry, and the people who carry out the science are just as human as the people who build trucks, fly helicoptors, run $100 billion companies, and fight wars around the world. It gets more confusing because now the people who ARE good at lies, misdirection, and politics are involved (on both sides).

To invalidate the science, or more importantly the scientific process, because it's carried out by human beings subject to the same weaknesses and sins as the rest of us can only be described as a massive step backwards for humanity.

Report this comment
#2) On January 28, 2010 at 10:28 AM, dudemonkey (49.29) wrote:

I also wanted to take a second to thank the skeptics for presenting their position in a clear, effective way.  It's been helpful to understand their objections and some of the things that have been brought up were things that I had not taken into account in my own thinking. 

Report this comment
#3) On January 28, 2010 at 10:31 AM, desertjedi (< 20) wrote:

I wouldn't be too concerned. There are always going to be some bad apples in any group. I think the majority of scientists doing work in the field of climate science are doing so for the right reasons...helping humanity maintain a viable future.

Unfortunately, stuff like this ends up as talking points for right-wing nut jobs who claim that human-caused climate change is bogus so we should simply continue treating our planet like a cess pool.

Report this comment
#4) On January 28, 2010 at 10:43 AM, kdakota630 (29.15) wrote:

Human-caused climate change is bogus so we should simply continue treating our planet like a cess pool.

Report this comment
#5) On January 28, 2010 at 11:27 AM, ChrisGraley (28.68) wrote:

So it's ok if someone commits a crime if they agree with your ideology?

Report this comment
#6) On January 28, 2010 at 11:48 AM, kwill10 (64.20) wrote:

No, committing a crime is not okay; however, that someone who has an ideology commits a crime is not by itself serve as an indictment against that ideology.  The information you posted should cast a cloud (no pun intended) over the climate research done by the scientists in question, but it shoud not serve as a broad condemnation of every climate change scientist any more than the Tuskeegee Experiment should invalidate all research done that involves human subjects.


Report this comment
#7) On January 28, 2010 at 12:16 PM, ChrisGraley (28.68) wrote:

You do know that Professor Jones is in charge of the department and one of the 3 main contributers to the famous hockey stick chart and the data that he is withholding is the basis for that chart, don't you?

Report this comment
#8) On January 30, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Lienbuster (94.35) wrote:

I think it is important to separate real environmental issues from AGW balderdash. Scientists who falsified data for the purpose of secondary gain should pay the same price as any other professional who intentionally commits fraud. The need to be prosecuted.

There are real changes in local climates occurring, but this is not the result of AGW, rather it is the product of very poor central planning, greed, and over-development. These sort of problems are not solved by taxing developed nations so that the affected countries can continue wasteful policies which degrade their topsoil and water supply.

Rather, these counties need to take a hard look at the effects of local policies and corruption and make the change themselves IMHO. If they don't they will reap the whirlwind.


Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners