Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Showing posts with label Phil Jones. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Phil Jones. Show all posts

Monday, February 15, 2010

CLIMATEGATE: DISGRACED PROFESSOR CRIES UNCLE

This one is really big. In light of last week's news that Phil Jones, climate scientist at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU) who had to step down a few months ago for his prominent role in the scandal, contemplated suicide, he may be going through a real catharsis here. If he truly is having an epiphany, he needs support and not derision.

Did he do wrong? Absolutely, but when a human being puts this amount of pride and intellectual / emotional investment aside and truly humbles himself, it is a victory for that individual to be celebrated. It is liberating, whatever the consequences to himself. I don't know if that's happened with Jones but signs are that he's close to doing so if he considered taking his own life and is making these stunning admissions.

Courtesy of the Daily Mail:
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.

The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.
While Jones' admissions were somewhat stunning, they didn't go all the way.
But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises were predominantly man-made.

Asked about whether he lost track of data, Professor Jones said: ‘There is some truth in that. We do have a trail of where the weather stations have come from but it’s probably not as good as it should be.

‘There’s a continual updating of the dataset. Keeping track of everything is difficult. Some countries will do lots of checking on their data then issue improved data, so it can be very difficult. We have improved but we have to improve more.’
Maybe I have a different take on this than most but if any of us were in a similar position, we'd be broken human beings in desperate need of support. Jones needs people around him that are going to help him go all the way through this admission. If he does, he will come out the other side as potentially one of the strongest allies in the fight against this despicable fraud. He's on the brink of admitting the entire truth and confessing the whole thing.

I am not saying that Jones shouldn't be held accountable for his complicity but I am saying it's time to start showing a little mercy and compassion.

Michael Mann on the other hand, still appears to be digging in his heels, displaying the raw arrogance and pride that only serves to anger those of us who know this entire charade is criminal. After all, now that his hockey stick chart has been proven to be completely fraudulent, he comes across as an arrogant boob, denying his hand is the one at the other end of his arm, inside the cookie jar.

'fess up, Mann.

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

FINALLY! NEW YORK TIMES COVERS CLIMATEGATE

Ah, that MSM continues to be behind the curve. It took 'em a while but it looks like the MSM may actually be starting to relent and is once again being dragged - kicking and screaming - to stories that they should have been covering ahead of those pesky bloggers in pajamas. Some may have a problem with this piece by John Tierney at the NYT based on his giving the benefit of the doubt to Michael Mann, the professor from Penn State responsible for the now debunked "hockey stick" chart that shows skyrocketing temperatures at the end of the 20th century.

However, to Tierney's credit, that part didn't come until much later in his article. The first part of the article consisted of a decently objective critique of the scientists implicated in Climategate and the frantically frustrated attempts of "Harry" to get it to all make sense.

The fact that the deference to Mann didn't occur at the beginning is a major step for the Times. Actually, Tierney linked to the "Hide the Decline" video before appearing to side with Mann's contentions by outwardly and prematurely admitting to taking Mann "at his word" despite what facts seem to indicate. For the record, the "Hide the Decline" video was posted on little old Barrack's blog BEFORE Thanksgiving.

Tierney actually goes beyond the incriminating emails and tackles the Harry_Read_Me files which are expected to shine an even brighter light on this scandal. Harry's efforts are getting increased attention. He gives the appearance of someone tasked with putting a square peg into a round hole without being told to stop.

For example, take a look at the first few paragraphs from Tierney's piece:
If you have not delved into the thousands of e-mail messages and files hacked from the computers of British climate scientists, let me give you the closest thing to an executive summary. It is taken from a file slugged HARRY_READ_ME, which is the log of a computer expert’s long struggle to make sense of a database of historical temperatures. Here is Harry’s summary of the situation:

Aarrggghhh!

That cry, in various spellings, is a motif throughout the log as Harry tries to fight off despair. “OH [EXPLETIVE] THIS!” he writes after struggling to reconcile readings from weather stations around the world. “It’s Sunday evening, I’ve worked all weekend, and just when I thought it was done I’m hitting yet another problem that’s based on the hopeless state of our databases. There is no uniform data integrity. ...”
Newspaper writing 101 states that the most powerful words come at the beginning. I know it requires reading between the proverbial lines but based on how Tierney started his article - and continued for some time - it's not far fetched to imagine climate change de-bunkers pumping their fists for several paragraphs.

Another example:
When a journal publishes a skeptic’s paper, the scientists e-mail one another to ignore it. They focus instead on retaliation against the journal and the editor, a project that is breezily added to the agenda of their next meeting: “Another thing to discuss in Nice!”

As the scientists denigrate their critics in the e-mail messages, they seem oblivious to one of the greatest dangers in the climate-change debate: smug groupthink. These researchers, some of the most prominent climate experts in Britain and America, seem so focused on winning the public-relations war that they exaggerate their certitude — and ultimately undermine their own cause.
Again, Tierney seems to get it and is pushing the right buttons. It's refreshing to see this coming from the likes of the New York Times, albeit a bit late.

Be sure to read the WHOLE THING. If you can overlook the apparent attempt by Tierney to soften the blow to Mann, it's actually quite good. Also remember, there are trillions of dollars at stake here. The powers that be definitely don't want to lose the New York Times - I know, hard to believe - but I think it's important to look at how Tierney approached writing this article rather than focusing on what he wrote about Mann several paragraphs in. On the whole, this piece is more damaging to the likes of Al Gore and the Climate change fraud-meisters than it is helpful to the folks at the CRU.

When it comes to the MSM, Climategate is moving at the speed of a glacier but this article in the NYT is equivalent to a sudden shift. Let's take our victories where we can get 'em and not hope for more than what we've come to expect. In my view, Tierney's piece gave us more than we should have expected.

drip, drip drip........that's the sound of the Climate change glacier.

Patience is necessary when wanting something this massive to pick up steam.

h/t to BG

HEAD OF CRU PHIL JONES STEPS DOWN....TEMPORARILY

Phil Jones, the head of East Anglia University's Climate Research Unit (CRU) and author of the email serving as the poster child of Climategate emails is stepping down. While the MSM continues to avoid the biggest scandal in the history of mankind, Climategate continues to heat up.

From the University of East Anglia WEBSITE:
Professor Phil Jones has today announced that he will stand aside as Director of the Climatic Research Unit until the completion of an independent Review resulting from allegations following the hacking and publication of emails from the Unit.

Professor Jones said: "What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible. After a good deal of consideration I have decided that the best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the Director's role during the course of the independent review and am grateful to the University for agreeing to this. The Review process will have my full support."

Vice-Chancellor Professor Edward Acton said: "I have accepted Professor Jones's offer to stand aside during this period. It is an important step to ensure that CRU can continue to operate normally and the independent review can conduct its work into the allegations.

“We will announce details of the Independent Review, including its terms of reference, timescale and the chair, within days. I am delighted that Professor Peter Liss, FRS, CBE, will become acting director.”


Here is the now infamous email sent by Phil Jones that has garnered the most attention in Climategate:
From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@xxx, mhughes@xxx
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@xxx,t.osborn@xxx

Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
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) amd 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.
Thanks for the comments, Ray.

Cheers
Phil

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone XXXXXX
School of Environmental Sciences Fax XXXXXX
University of East Anglia
Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Breitbart
Doug Ross
Drudge
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Instapundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Mediaite
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
NewsBusters
Newsmax
News Real
Pajamas Media
Politico
Powerline
Rasmussen
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive