Crash Post : Climategate Mk 2.

A new dump of what looks to be another batch of very candid emails between climate scientists has just been leaked onto the internet. At first glance, they appear to be what was left out of the original “selection of emails” referred to in the original climategate readme file.

You can download your copy of the zip archive (was) HERE. Get your copy while you can because there’s no guarantee it’ll be there for long. The file has been taken down. Can anyone who’s got a working link, please post it as a comment?

First question: Are they genuine?

Preliminary indications are that they are indeed genuine or someone has gone to a lot of trouble and done a hell of a lot of typing to plant a piece of disinformation into the blogosphere. As with the original climategate leak, their provenance can only be proved by the lack of denial between the parties emailing each other.

This is going to have to be a crash post and I will be adding to it as the story develops and I read through the release. Just hit F5 or refresh to pick up the latest developments.

The archive contains a readme.txt file which begins with the text –

/// FOIA 2011 — Background and Context ///

“Over 2.5 billion people live on less than $2 a day.”

“Every day nearly 16.000 children die from hunger and related causes.”

“One dollar can save a life” — the opposite must also be true.

“Poverty is a death sentence.”

“Nations must invest $37 trillion in energy technologies by 2030 to stabilize
greenhouse gas emissions at sustainable levels.”

Today’s decisions should be based on all the information we can get, not on
hiding the decline.

This archive contains some 5.000 emails picked from keyword searches.  A few
remarks and redactions are marked with triple brackets.

The rest, some 220.000, are encrypted for various reasons.  We are not planning
to publicly release the passphrase.

We could not read every one, but tried to cover the most relevant topics such
as…

I have put the entire readme file here.

The “Background and Context” section of the readme file is then followed by the leaker’s own selection of emails aggregated under the following section names and in the following sequence –

/// The IPCC Process ///

/// Communicating Climate Change ///

/// The Medieval Warm Period ///

/// The Settled Science ///

/// The Urban Heat Effect ///

/// Temperature Reconstructions ///

/// Science and Religion ///

/// Climate Models ///

/// The Cause ///

/// Freedom of Information ///

Some preliminary thoughts.

I’ve always considered that the readme text with the original climategate release showed a very precise usage of English. When it referred to a “selection of emails”, the obvious implication was that there were a lot more and given that they had complete access to the whole of the email server, I saw no reason why they’d not bagged the lot.

I’d second guessed that the “selection” was their insurance policy just in case CRU were ever imprudent enough to catch them and attempt to put them on trial. Patently, if the emails are genuine, I did a disservice to their motives, for which I apologise. They’ve been sifting through the emails for the best part of two years, patiently watching all the whitewash investigations grinding through their preordained pantomimes and biding their time.

Their timing is of course perfect.

Looking around the warmist sites, the spin is a tad slow in taking off; they’re just as nonplussed as the skeptics by this bombshell. Both the Guardian and BBC, in the form of Richard Black (you know, the other big BBC pundit of global warming, the one who wasn’t commenting in an undeclared COI fashion on the original climategate after accepting £15,000 grant from UEA) are both having a go at the “move along now, nothing here to see” line but even their heart isn’t in it. Poor devils really; all those years of earnest dedication undermined so brutally yet again. These so-called scientists give veniality a bad name.

There seems to be a growing conviction that the emails are genuine and but please bear in mind that it’ll take some time to put that statement beyond dispute.

With the best will in the world, it’s simply not possible to go through this quantity of emails in any short timescale, so as an alternative, I’m going to look at  the selection the leaker themselves chose and give my thoughts about them under the headings they themselves aggregated them under. Hit refresh every so often to catch the updates.

The IPCC Process

What’s being discussed here is the backroom process of rigging the IPCC report to contain only information that is conducive to their belief that the globe is warming. The attitudes displayed by the parties involved range from the fringe elements of the group who know “the big decisions are made at the eleventh hour by a select core group” to some pretty active plotting. Have a read and make your own mind up.

Communicating Climate Change

This is a bunch of so-called scientists doing nothing more than coming to a consensus on the spin. A selection of quotes ; “the important thing is to make sure they’re loosing the PR battle”, “I can’t overstate the HUGE amount of political interest”, “We don’t really want the bullshit and optimistic stuff that Michael has written”, “the most valuable thing to do is to tell the story about abrupt change as vividly as possible”, “In my experience, global warming freezing is already a bit of a public relations problem with the media”, “I agree with Nick that climate change might be a better labelling than global warming”. I could go on but I’m sure the quotes give you a good sense of the thing.

The Medieval Warm Period

The usual discussion about ways to minimise or localise it. One bright spark comes up with a bit of rename spin – “Medieval Climate Anomaly” or MCA. That obviously didn’t disappear it enough to be adopted into the spin.

The Settled Science

Various discussions but the really interesting thing is that what’s being discussed here are not inconsequential details but some of the backbone concepts of the area. They know they’re on extremely thin ice when it comes to any scientific certainty, despite what they’re saying in public. One of them even says “What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us probably.” We won’t have to, these emails are their suicide note …

The Urban Heat Effect

Predictably, the discussion revolves around downplaying any such effect. Anyone consistently finding a UHI signature is not a fellow seeker after scientific truth but a “jerk” apparently. Getting an inside view of thuggery is never that tasteful.

Temperature Reconstructions

Lots of fun and games here. The Mann/Jones paper seems only fit for your lavatory, from some of the comments made here. McIntyre totally vindicated by this quote –  “The reconstructions clearly show a ‘hockey-stick’ trend. I guess this is precisely the phenomenon that Macintyre (sic) has been going on about.” However, knowing McIntyre was right, forced no withdrawal from them of the statistically laughable techniques used which would always produce a hockey stick.

Science and Religion

This is an interesting section for the leaker to add and I’ll not be commenting on it.

Climate Models

An area I know and love. Oh boy, you can feel reality biting into them when it comes to trying to model reality. They think it may take decades to be in a position to model anything significant but that’s just stage one withdrawal symptoms from the heroin dreams of models. It’s impossible to model complex non-linear systems on anything, even the almighty computer. We don’t even have anything approaching the math required for it, if such a thing exists. When you subtract the models from climate science, it’s kaputt. Nighty night and should I say goodnight Vienna …

The Cause

The “cause” referred to here is global warming. What a dreadful mindset for any man of science to have. Science and therefore truth subservient to the cause. Josef Mengele went down that path and he’d lots of company too. You perhaps begin to see why the leaker included the science and religion section.

Freedom of Information

Possibly the most conspiratorial discussions and also the ones most likely to put some people before a court of law. It’s all about dodging, hiding and deleting emails in order to shelter from FOIs. Prof. Jones himself – “Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden.” I know the statute of limitations has run out in the UK but I can’t help wondering if the same applies in the States. Perhaps the Virginia AG Mr. Cuccinelli can advise us on that one?

Some closing thoughts.

It’s going to take some time to sift through such a quantity of emails but even at this early juncture, some effects of this second release of emails are obvious.

Twenty-four hours ago, global warming still had some remaining political support from the mainstream parties worldwide, although this had been severely tempered by the budgetary constraints of the global recession. All political support will now be running for cover. They are now friendless, political pariahs.

Certain important personages and some venerable scientific bodies went to bat for them and gave them a completely clean bill of health after supposedly “investigating” them. In the light of this second tsunami, they’ll not only have to think about whether they should do so again but also whether it’s better to cut climate science and these scientists adrift, to cauterise the wound for the greater good of the reputation of science as a whole. At this point, I strongly suspect they’ll go for the latter course or run the very real risk of going down with them.

The scientific establishment will not be the only ones obliged to think along those lines. The mainstream media, for so long their cheerleaders, faces a similar dilemma. Early indications, such as the BBC reporting on climategate 2 straight away, although in surprisingly neutral terms, doesn’t auger well for the “cause”, as Michael Mann calls it. I also note in the same television piece, we’d been subtly promoted back to skeptics from deniers, their usual appellation for us. The BBC of course, are currently having their own COI problems with environmental “reporting” but I do sense the beginnings of a slow disengagement from the cause.

For certain individuals, within both the scientific and media establishment, there is also a very personal calculation to be made at this moment. If they don’t dump the scientists, will they be dumped themselves? At this point, old-fashioned survival instinct tends to have a big say in how things will pan out.

This second release of emails will have absolutely no effect on the moneymen, since they had already cashed out of their positions in green sectors by the middle of last year. Unlike a lot of people involved in this mess, they know when to cut a loss, which is to say early.

Given the certain loss of political support and the probable loss of mainstream media support, the activists are all but finished. Yes, they’ll rally the alarmist blogosphere, when they’ve got over the shock, and do their best to mitigate the damage but this one is terminal.

Happy climategate everyone.

©Pointman

Related articles by Pointman :

Why climategate was not a computer hack

A profile of the climategate whistleblower.

Happy birthday climategate.

Click for a list of other articles.

Comments
35 Responses to “Crash Post : Climategate Mk 2.”
  1. Phillip Bratby says:

    I think you’ve got it right with your preliminary thoughts.

  2. Jo Nova says:

    Their timing was not “perfect” it could have been two or three months ago before the Australian government wrote the damn C-tax😉

  3. meltemian says:

    Please forgive my ignorance but who decided on the 5,000 emails that have been released? What about the 220,000 not released?
    Anyway, whatever, Hooray!!

    • Pointman says:

      Hi Mel, that would be the leaker. As for the rest not being released, let the speculation begin.

      P

      • meltemian says:

        Thanks Pointman, still rushing around from place to place trying to catch-up on this. I gather they were ‘pass-phrase protected’ so it definitely has to be an inside job, you were right.
        Sorry Jo, whoever the leaker is they can’t be Australian can they?

      • PaulW says:

        This must start to create an interesting dilema for various scientific and media organisations. After the last round of email releases there was serious investigations and everything was found to be above board.
        However we now find a new round. The investigators now have to wonder what else is to come.
        So do they;
        1. stick there head in the sand and ignore any further releases with a “we have already addressed this” so there is no further action required.
        2. Completely ignore it “what emails, they are fakes”
        3. Have another investigation and find them innocent again
        4. Recommend a thorough judicial investigation

        Who’s on for a bet – I am going for 1.

  4. Edward. says:

    Pointy, now you know we have to be careful here…………….but, are they the real thing?

    Because if they are – real that is, then the s*$% has really been shovelled at the fan.

    It blows Mike E et al, out of the water and exposes his sh*&” grasp of the language too [pedant!], can’t help it.

    Bloody hell!

    Durban clusterf***ed.

  5. Mike says:

    Well, they managed to get up again after the first climategate emails. Will they manage it again like some villain froma B-Grade monster flick. Every time you think they are dead, they rise again. Will this be the final time, the killer blow?

    At any rate it’s getting harder and harder for the average person who still believes to defend it. I think their numbers are dwindling and that is the only thing holding the whole thing up. It’s certainly not facts.🙂

  6. Hillbilly33 says:

    It was always my belief there were many more emails held in reserve either for “insurance” and/or later release when appropriate. Like Jo Nova, I would rather it had been before Gillard’s destructive CO2 tax, but on the positive side if the emails are genuine, what an even bigger goose she and her cobbled-together government will look, along with co-conspirators Bob Brown, Christine Milne, Greg Combet, Wayne Swan etc.,and the self-seeking “independents” Windsor, Oakeshott and Wilkie. Going to be very interesting to see how the Australian ABC and other lame-stream media handle this lot. Let’s increase the pressure as much as possible! This old heart has been re-invigorated!

    • Edward. says:

      Don’t hold your breath with the ABC mate, they’re nearly as bad as the bloody BBC.

      Joolya’s lot are going to be hammered in the next election, her perfidy will not be forgotten quickly and then a proper government can retract that Godawful Bill.

    • Pointman says:

      Hillbilly, can you keep us informed of the spin the Oz MSM puts on it? Ta.

      P

      • Hillbilly33 says:

        Happy to oblige Pointman but I can’t add much more to the summary by Black Swan. You would no doubt be aware that Jo Nova is doing her best but most posters there are frustratedly reporting no stirring of the MSM. Though they are faithfully reporting all the usual scare stories arising before every annual exotic jaunt by proponents and hangers-on of the AGW industry, the only reference to Climategate 2 by “our ABC” is a link to the UK Guardian article by Leo Hickman.
        .
        From reading that article detailing the instant responses of some of the “team”, it almost seems they were forewarned of specific emails being released, unless they had been preparing for the event for a long time.

        It is plain the “spin” is going to be “ho-hum”, we’ve heard it all before, they’ve been cleared by an umpteen inquiries and it doesn’t alter “the settled science” and “overwhelming consensus”!

        I fear that with the trillions of dollars now wrapped up in renewable investments there is no stopping this juggernaut until fuel poverty really hits the majority of poorer people, the world economies hit bottom and the extravagant wasteful “renewable” subsidies run out. The carpet-baggers will have made their money and the gullible generations that swallowed the AGW scam and were conned into believing they were “saving the planet” will be left with their shattered illusions to try and rebuild faith in science and pick up the pieces of ruined economies.

        I note that China is starting to look a bit shaky growth-wise. If they go down, the Australian economy is history big-time!

        PS. Gillard’s faithful lackeys in the once respected CSIRO and BoM have just released another report, this one on the “terrible” effects of “climate change” on our neighbours and the Pacific area if we don’t rein in CO2 emissions, all dutifully covered in depth by “our ABC”!

  7. Pointman says:

    The cache of files seems to disappear from various places on the web but there’s a still a copy here (at the moment).

    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ROCGBR37

    Please ensure you run your own anti virus over it before using it.

    Pointman

  8. scud says:

    Hey P.

    Already a dedicated search engine up and running.. http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4

    So far I’ve been amusing myself by typing in rude words. Potty mouthed they are…for a bunch of ‘scientists’.

  9. 8001 says:

    This is lovely. I wasn’t interested enough back then to follow the unfolding of the first Climategate but this one is definitely lovely.
    Anyway, to be honest the most exciting thing about it all is not the batch of emails that’s just been released but the one still locked up behind a password. There’s loads of ’em there and they were left for the last round – I wonder, is it just filler material that was deemed too unintresting/non-controversial? Or is it something that would really finish the climate change bull excrement with a fatality strike?
    I’d be sad if it turned out that the rest of the emails is just random crap that wasn’t worth putting in the first two batches. I really would. We really need a bombshell. A big one. A nuke, even. So if it turns out to be just a firecracker, I hope at least they won’t make us wait too long for it.

  10. Ed from Ohio says:

    Curiuos to your thoughts that this still was an inside job? If it truley was then it has to be a higher up. You could not spend the time searching through a quarter million emails and data in your evenings and on weekends with out some staff. This seems it involves a very small cadre of I think scientists because of the nature of the material with the time to sort through it.

    • Pointman says:

      Hello and welcome EdFromOhio. We already have a regular commenter Ed here, so if you can come up with a better declision of your handle, please do so!

      I still think it was an inside job and nothing about the latest release would indicate otherwise. After all, it’s just a bigger selection of the stuff they bagged two years ago. They’ve had two years to sort through the material and as it’s in “soft” format, software can be used to search through it. ie They actually say – “This archive contains some 5.000 emails picked from keyword searches.”

      Patently, knowledge of climate science is required simply to be able to pick out chatter from significant email traffic. As to whether they’re high up, I can’t see much to indicate that either way.

      Pointman

      • Ed from Ohio says:

        Thankyou for you insite. I will change my handle to pacman for clarity. Great site enjoy your articles.

  11. Blackswan says:

    Pointman,

    There’s been almost no mention of this new release of emails in the Oz press. Andrew Bolt is the only MSM columnist who has given it any attention at all ….

    Howard blasts IPCC and alarmists’ “intellectual bullying”

    http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/andrewbolt/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/howard_blasts_ipcc_and_alarmists_intellectual_bullying/

    This morning, in the Australian, we find this …..

    “BRITISH and Australian scientists in 2003 discussed making the Great Barrier Reef a “global icon” for public concern over climate change — in part to help the employment prospects of one British researcher.”<.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/barrier-reef-job-among-leaked-mail/story-e6frg6xf-1226204095345

    I think the CRU whistleblower waited far too long for a follow-up. Two years means that it gave the establishment an opportunity to mount their farcical Inquiries, and having splashed around liberal coats of whitewash, they can simply be dismissive and say "This is old news – we've already dealt with that".

    The 'scientists' still have tenure, the DoE hasn't done a thing to recover the $20 million in grants paid to the UEA CRU, Cuccinelli still hasn't succeeded in forcing Mann to cough up the data to substantiate his hockey-stick, the UK still has its Climate Act and we still have our Carbon Dioxide Tax.

    While the trolls appear to be spooked because they think the jig is up, the pragmatists among them will soon calm them down by reassuring them that they are still a protected species. I believe that they are – too much money, too many reputations, too many bridges have been crossed for any part of the Establishment to ever admit the whole thing was, and is, the biggest Fraud in world history.

    For me, the most telling quote is ….. “What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us probably.”

    If "they" is referring to "us", then he's probably right. If "they" means governments or law enforcement, then he can rest comfortably in his bed at night and amuse himself counting his cash. Plenty of his partners-in-crime are doing just that.

  12. Mike says:

    In regards to the password protection, is this an insurance policy?

    Do the climate people know (or suspect) who the leaker is, but are forced to withold their knowledge from authorities due to the unreleased, password protected information?

    Is there more going on behind the scenes than most people suspect?

    Are the poster’s motives completely altruistic?

    At any rate it’s intriguing.

    The curious thing about this whole thing is that the emails don’t matter. The fact that the science has already proved the theory wrong is enough. That it alone, did not cause a killer blow, suggests there is a real problem getting the truth out, about anything, in our society, due to the absolute flood of propaganda and bad information. Our brains are like computers (or more probably computer networks). Bad information in, bad information out. It’s no wonder why so many people come to the wrong conclusions.

    • Pointman says:

      Hiya Mike. As it happens, I’ve been thinking a lot about the password protection aspect of the latest climategate release. I’ll be putting some thoughts out in a post when I can find some time.

      Pointman

      • Mike says:

        Cool, looking forward to it.

        I think it’s entirely possible that there could be some blackmail going on here, but who knows? Nothing is ever quite what it seems. Time for us to start reading between the lines.

        I wouldn’t be surprised if there aren’t any “good guys” in this affair.

  13. scud says:

    P. I think you’ll like this one!!

    http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=2248

    LOL!

    • Pointman says:

      As you say Scud, I do like it. What I’d really like is to get my hands on are the emails from above …

      P

    • Blackswan says:

      G’day Scud,

      That IS a juicy morsel isn’t it?

      ….. “they made me the Director of the Hadley Centre – a job that I know doesn’t exist!” In fact says it twice – for emphasis.

      Very tasty indeed. Wondering who “they” might be and if such a job appears on the Govt payroll, at what salary and what expenses are attached to it?

      Don’t you worry Phil old boy – no need to go into hiding again. Someone will throw another bucket of whitewash over you. You just count that cash old son, plenty more where that came from eh?

  14. Gault Falcon says:

    As a rational, caring human being you read the possibility that there is such a large group of people willing to perpetrate this type of fraud when the stakes are so high and you think, it can not be. Then you read stories like this and you tell yourself that you can’t believe your lying eyes.

    It is upsetting to know that human nature is so susceptible to corruption. What is more upsetting is how adept the most susceptible seem to be at gaining positions of power where they can lord over the lives of billions of people.

    With all of the influence they wield they appear strong and powerful. Reading some of the text of these emails reveals how pathetic and weak they all really are.

    As of now, the MSM here in the U.S. has been mum on the story. I guess the other two places weak minded rubes seem to gravitate are the media and politics.

    Thanks for all of your good work Pointman.

    • Pointman says:

      Hello and welcome Gault.

      I seem to be saying that to a lot of people today. You sound a bit down about the basic self-centred lack of humanity of some people. Don’t be. FOIA is a great example of someone putting themselves well into harm’s way for no benefit to themselves but for the benefit of other people.

      Lonely courage like that is a personal inspiration to me. I’ll fight harder because of it. It’s a good day to be a human being.

      Pointman

  15. cohenite says:

    Hi Pointman; when I did an initial search I came across one mention of Goldman Sachs in one email but I can’t find it again; my search skills are not great so I was wondering whether you have a link to that email?

    Cheers

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: