Hadley CRU hacked with release of hundreds of docs and emails

The hacker(s) are my new heroes!

Three cheers for Justice!! Woot woot woot

reply to post by Stormdancer777


I'm just Uploading the Data to a standard File-Hoster so anyone can download them.

When i'm finished you'll get the link

File Download-Link







[edit on 20-11-2009 by D0MiNAT0R 1OOO]

[edit on 20-11-2009 by D0MiNAT0R 1OOO]

Originally posted by mnemeth1
oh, btw, start sending this to all blogs and radio shows.

While you're at it, this would be a great time to start coining the phrase,

"GLOBAL WARMING THEORY"

Having that 'theory' in there would really make a gradual impact on public feeling about it.

Well, Al Gore has to be freaking out. That's one benefit to this already IMO.

Here is one of the credits from the "science" behind An Inconvenient Truth:

1 According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), this era of global warming "is unlikely to be entirely natural in origin" and "the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence of the global climate."

Link: www.climatecrisis.net...

With the link to the IPCC already established, this should get interesting.
Call for removal of NPP anyone?

Another interesting blogpost, while we wait for the story to hit the mainstream media:

From HotAir
hotair.com...

Do hacked e-mails show global-warming fraud?

Controversy has exploded onto the Internet after a major global-warming advocacy center in the UK had its e-mail system hacked and the data published on line. The director of the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit confirmed that the e-mails are genuine — and Australian publication Investigate and the Australian Herald-Sun report that those e-mails expose a conspiracy to hide detrimental information from the public that argues against global warming (via Watt’s Up With That):

The internet is on fire this morning with confirmation computers at one of the world’s leading climate research centres were hacked, and the information released on the internet.

A 62 megabyte zip file, containing around 160 megabytes of emails, pdfs and other documents, has been confirmed as genuine by the head of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, Dr Phil Jones.

In an exclusive interview with Investigate magazine’s TGIF Edition, Jones confirms his organization has been hacked, and the data flying all over the internet appears to have come from his organisation.

“It was a hacker. 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.”

One of the most damning e-mails published comes from Dr. Jones himself. In an e-mail from almost exactly ten years ago, Jones appears to discuss a method of overlaying data of temperature declines with repetitive, false data of higher temperatures:

From: Phil Jones
To: ray bradley ,mann@[snipped], mhughes@
[snipped]
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: k.briffa@[snipped],t.osborn@[snipped]
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 [sic] from1961 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

Jones told Investigate that he couldn’t remember the context of “hide the decline,” and that the process was a way to fill data gaps rather than mislead. But when scientists talk about “tricks” in the context of hiding data, it certainly seems suspicious.

Andrew Bolt points to a couple of other suspicious entries in the database as well for the Herald-Sun. For instance, here we have scientists discussing how to delete inconvenient data in order to emphasize other data that supports their conclusions:

From: Tom Wigley [...]
To: Phil Jones [...]
Subject: 1940s
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:25:38 -0600
Cc: Ben Santer [...]
Phil,
Here are some speculations on correcting SSTs to partly explain the 1940s warming blip. If you look at the attached plot you will see that theland also shows the 1940s blip (as I’m sure you know).
So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC, then this would be significant for the global mean – but we’d still have to explain the land blip. I’ve chosen 0.15 here deliberately. This still leaves an ocean blip, and i think one needs to have some form of ocean blip to explain the land blip (via either some common forcing, or ocean forcing land, or vice versa, or all of these). When you look at other blips, the land blips are 1.5 to 2 times (roughly) the ocean blips—higher sensitivity plus thermal inertia effects. My 0.15 adjustment leaves things consistent with this, so you can see where I am coming from.
Removing ENSO does not affect this.
It would be good to remove at least part of the 1940s blip, but we are still left with “why the blip”.
Let me go further. If you look at NH vs SH and the aerosol effect (qualitatively or with MAGICC) then with a reduced ocean blip we get continuous warming in the SH, and a cooling in the NH—just as one would expect with mainly NH aerosols.
The other interesting thing is (as Foukal et al. note – from MAGICC) that the 1910-40 warming cannot be solar. The Sun can get at most 10% of this with Wang et al solar, less with Foukal solar. So this may well be NADW, as Sarah and I noted in 1987 (and also Schlesinger later). A reduced SST blip in the 1940s makes the 1910-40 warming larger than the SH (which it currently is not)—but not really enough.
So … why was the SH so cold around 1910? Another SST problem? (SH/NH data also attached.)
This stuff is in a report I am writing for EPRI, so I’d appreciate any comments you (and Ben) might have.
Tom.

Hmmm. Sounds like “hid[ing] the data” once again. And here we have them privately admitting that they can’t find the global warming that they’ve been predicting:

From: Kevin Trenberth
To: Michael Mann
Subject: Re: BBC U-turn on climate
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:57:37 -0600
Cc: Stephen H Schneider , Myles Allen , peter stott , “Philip D. Jones” , Benjamin Santer , Tom Wigley , Thomas R Karl , Gavin Schmidt , James Hansen , Michael Oppenheimer

Hi all

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.

This is January weather (see the Rockies baseball playoff game was canceled on saturday and then played last night in below freezing weather).

Trenberth, K. E., 2009: An imperative for climate change planning: tracking Earth’s global energy. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 1, 19-27, doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2009.06.001. [1][PDF] (A PDF of the published version can be obtained from the author.)
***

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.***

Do scientists use data to test theories, or do they use theories to test data? Scientists will claim the former, but here we have scientists who cling to the theory so tightly that they reject the data. That’s not science; it’s religious belief.

Dr. Jones has confirmed that these e-mails are genuine. Whether the work represented by these scientists is as genuine seems to be under serious question. Tim Blair says, “The fun is officially underway.”

Continued with updates at the source

www.guardian.co.uk...

Climate sceptics claim leaked emails are evidence of collusion among scientistsHundreds of emails and documents exchanged between world's leading climate scientists stolen by hackers and leaked online

Leo Hickman guardian.co.uk, Friday 20 November 2009 15.31 GMT Article history

Hundreds of private emails and documents allegedly exchanged between some of the world's leading climate scientists over the past 13 years have been stolen by hackers and leaked online. The computer files were apparently accessed earlier this week from servers at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, a world-renowned centre focused on the study of natural and anthropogenic climate change.


Climate change sceptics who have studied the emails allege that they provide "smoking gun" evidence that some of the climatologists colluded in manipulating data to support the widely held view among the world's climatologists that climate change is real and is being largely caused by the actions of mankind. So far the veracity of the emails has not been confirmed and the scientists involved have declined to comment on the story which broke on a blog called The Air Vent.


The files, which in total amount to 61Mb of data, were first uploaded onto a Russian server, before being widely mirrored across the internet. The emails were accompanied by the anonymous statement, "We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, too important to be kept under wraps. We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code, and documents. Hopefully it will give some insight into the science and the people behind it."


A spokesperson for the University of East Anglia said: "We are aware that information from a server used for research information in one area of the university has been made available on public websites. Because of the volume of this information we cannot currently confirm that all of this material is genuine. This information has been obtained and published without our permission and we took immediate action to remove the server in question from operation. We are undertaking a thorough internal investigation and we have involved the police in this enquiry."

more at the link

reply to post by Libertygal


great work!

Demand our government open a full investigation and demand the media pursue this.

This is pure fraud and those engaging in it should be prosecuted.

Originally posted by D0MiNAT0R 1OOO
reply to post by Stormdancer777

 

I'm just Uploading the Data to a standard File-Hoster so anyone can download them.
You only have to extract them with WinRar or an other Packer who can process rar-files (such as. 7-Zip).
When i'm finished you'll get the link

Winrar



[edit on 20-11-2009 by D0MiNAT0R 1OOO]

Thanks

I hope this exposes the cult of global warming for what it really is.

A SCAM.

I believed at first. But the more I look. The more bs I see. Now this leak could just be the icing on the cake.

Nice treat inside too...

Gilligans Island picture from 90° North xD (and the last surviving Polar Bear?)

Too bad they degrade the characters of Gilligans Island (NEVER thought that possible.)

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/11caa1762b56.jpg[/atsimg]

Great find OP



[edit on 11·20·09 by DrMattMaddix]

Bleh Breitbart/Big Government posted the blue dress story

I was hoping for more from them.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Here the Link
Hacked Server Files

www.anelegantchaos.org...

found this on another forum

These need to be posted here before they disappear.

[edit on 113030p://bFriday2009 by Stormdancer777]

Good deal wished more of the hackers would do this in many places to expose our crooked ass governments and firms score 1 for the hackers

reply to post by Stormdancer777


Great link!
As a side effect, I think exposing the Emails in that way on a website will lead to mass spamming to their authors.

By the way the parent page also has a search function:
www.anelegantchaos.org...
(...but after checking, this page doesn't seem to be correctly working, though. Maybe later)

[edit on 2009-11-20 by Shirakawa]

reply to post by Shirakawa

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.***

Do scientists use data to test theories, or do they use theories to test data? Scientists will claim the former, but here we have scientists who cling to the theory so tightly that they reject the data. That’s not science; it’s religious belief.

Dr. Jones has confirmed that these e-mails are genuine. Whether the work represented by these scientists is as genuine seems to be under serious question. Tim Blair says, “The fun is officially underway.”

The bloody bastards! You are supposed to use the data to make an analysis, not the other way around.

I don't know if it has been mentioned here, but the *.PRO files are Prolog 7 it appears (PDC - Prolog Development Corporation out of Europe). It is an excellent programming tool and extremely effective in LPD, AI functions and relational database construction. Because of the predicate based nature of the prolog programming language, it is extremely easy to fudge formulas, numbers and develop "what-if" scenarios. Prolog is a very powerful tool and in the hands of obvious tools like this bunch at the ICPP, dangerous. However, I will reverse engineer and/or comment all of the programs when I have the time, since I have been writing in prolog since the mid 80's.

Cheers - Dave

rom: John Daly To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Climatic warming in Tasmania Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 20:04:00 +1100 Cc: Ed Cook , [email protected], [email protected], Mike Barbetti , [email protected], [email protected]

Dear Neville,

You mentioned to me some time ago that in your view, the 11-year solar cycle did not influence temperature. There have been numerous attempts by academics to establish a correlation, but each has been shot down on some ground or other. I remember Barrie Pittock was especially dismissive of attempts to correlate solar cycle with temperature.

Have you tried this approach?

Load "Mathematica" into your PC and run the following set of instructions -

data = ReadList[ "c:\sydney.txt", Number] dataElements = Length[data] X = ListPlot[ data, PlotJoined-> True]; fourierTrans = Fourier[data]; ListPlot[Abs[fourierTrans], PlotJoined -> True];

fitfun1 = Fit[data,[1,x,x^2,x^3,Sin[11 2 Pi x/dataElements], Cos[11 2 Pi x/dataElements]],x]; fittable = Table[N[fitfun1], [x, dataElements]]; Y = ListPlot[fittable, PlotJoined -> True]; Show[X, Y]

The reference to "c:\sydney.txt" is a suggested pathname for the following set of data - which is Sydney's annual mean temperature.

16.8 16.5 16.8 17 17 16.7 17.1 17.4 17.9 17.4 17.2 17.1 16.9 17 17.2 17.2 17.4 17.6 17.6 17.6 16.7 17.1 16.8 17.4 16.8 17.3 17.8 17.5 17.1 17.2 17.6 17.3 17.1 16.9 16.9 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.6 17.5 17.4 17.2 17.1 17.3 17.2 17.2 16.9 17.5 17.4 17.2 17 17.5 17.4 17.5 17.7 18.3 17.8 17.4 17.2 17.4 18.3 17.3 18 18.1 18 17.5 17.3 18 17 18.2 17.4 17.6 17.5 17.4 17.1 17.4 17.3 17.5 17.7 18 17.8 18 17.4 17.8 16.8 17.5 17.4 17.6 17.6 17.2 17.4 17.9 17.9 17.6 17.7 17.8 17.7 17.6 17.8 18.3 18 17.6 17.8 17.8 17.8 18.1 17.9 17.5 17.8 18.3 18 17.7 17.3 17.5 18.5 17.4 17.8 17.7 17.8 17.7 18 18.5 18.2 17.8 18.1 17.5 17.8 17.8 18 18.6 18.1 18.1 18.6

So Far so good.

"Mathematica" first plots out the data itself (see Atachment 1)

The first part of the instruction set lets "mathematica" do a Fourier Transform on the data, ie. searching out the periodicities, if there are any. The result is shown on Attachment 2.

The transform result shows a sharp spike at the 11 year point (I wonder what is significant about 11 years?). The second part of the instructions now acts upon this observed spike (the Cos 11 bit), to extract it's waveform from the rest of the noise. The result is shown as a waveform in attachment 3, the waves having an 11-year period, with the long-term Sydney warming easily evident.

Attachment 4 shows the original Sydney data overlaid against the 11-year periodicity.

It would appear that the solar cycle does indeed affect temperature.

(I tried the same run on the CRU global temperature set. Even though CRU must be highly smoothed by the time all the averages are worked out, the 11-year pulse is still there, albeit about half the size of Sydneys).

Stay cool.

OH lookie here,

It would appear that the solar cycle does indeed affect temperature.

And to think you have to go to college to know that,

Looks like the cat is outta the bag.

meowww

The thread title looks mundane, 'yet another hacker' whistle-blow.

But this is massive!! Admitted globalist climate-change academics caught RED-HANDED in a genuine, illegal conspiracy to lie to the world about so-called man-made global warming!!

This is a Godzilla story!! Not just 'hacking' Please redo the title!!

It would be such a relief if this hoax could be defeated. There are so many people on the other end of it who's lives will be devastated by the economic consequences of the cap and trade and health care bills. mine included. I really want to thank whoever the hacker was for being a hero and to thank whoever is able to make use of the data


[edit on 20-11-2009 by m khan]