|
Post by jurinko on Nov 20, 2009 12:14:27 GMT
*will work for food*
Mike Salmon, IT manager, CRU
(just for fun)
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Nov 20, 2009 12:27:50 GMT
Does anyone have a method of making the text files more readable?
|
|
|
Post by jurinko on Nov 20, 2009 12:28:55 GMT
Ratty, open them in Wordpad instead of Notepad. Or vice versa.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Nov 20, 2009 12:31:39 GMT
It's always the simple answers <sigh>. Old age, I guess <blush>
Be very careful with this stuff. If I can read & edit the files, anybody can. I smell a trap …….. but I could be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Nov 20, 2009 13:15:19 GMT
The effects of this from a political perspective are going to be more extensive than have been realized. The files are out in the internet and will now live in public view for ever.
First - the initial effects could be that anyone about to speak at Copenhagen will have to sanitize their papers removing anything that may be 'tainted' with whatever is in the 61mb of released (and now multiply copied) files. At this short notice that is going to be very difficult. There will be an increased amount of shouting from both sides.
But this is very much the earthquake - the tsunami that might follow could be more politically and scientifically damaging to everyone. Politicians who may be looking for a graceful departure from the 'AGW' or 'Climate Change' bandwagon due to lower public interest, may use this 'we've been duped by the scientists we trusted' exit. Politicians do not like being duped by groups that they have supported with finance. So we may see the start of a backlash against science funding - it comes just at a time when there is an increasing demand for budget cuts worldwide. This will NOT be good for anyone working in research looking for funding.
The aftershocks are still to come - probably from the fine-tooth comb of the blogs. It is there that people will crawl over that 61Mb (and perhaps more was taken but not so publicly displayed?) So there could be much more to come and all the people in those emails will be wondering what the effects of that will be. If they resign call the police etc etc then they lend credence to all that is in the 61mb. A sword of Damocles with the thread starting to fail.
|
|
|
Post by twawki on Nov 20, 2009 13:15:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hunter on Nov 20, 2009 13:15:57 GMT
Hadley has apparently stated they are real. This was not a hack. It was a leak by a conscience driven insider. Hadley is lying when they call it a hack.
|
|
|
Post by hunter on Nov 20, 2009 13:20:06 GMT
The real question is for our AGW believing friends: are you now ready to question the credibility of the idea that the world is facing an apocalypse driven by CO2?
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Nov 20, 2009 13:38:44 GMT
Who is qualified to pick the relevant bits out of the leaked stuff and PROVE it's legit?
|
|
|
Post by hunter on Nov 20, 2009 14:03:03 GMT
Who is qualified to pick the relevant bits out of the leaked stuff and PROVE it's legit? Hadley has acknowledged they are true. Either this is an authentic e-mail archive dump, or it is a fabrication. There is no such thing as 'false-but-true.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Nov 20, 2009 14:06:31 GMT
The real question is for our AGW believing friends: are you now ready to question the credibility of the idea that the world is facing an apocalypse driven by CO2? A self evident argument should not need subterfuge - the very presence of subterfuge is an indication that even the proponents of the AGW hypothesis feel it is weak.
|
|
|
Post by twawki on Nov 20, 2009 14:11:00 GMT
Its starting to happen - online comments from people who know the authors are starting to verify their language etc as well as Jones acknowledging it has happened. Its going to be an interesting week - and just as Turnbull says he will force skeptical politicians in his party to resign - I think his head will roll - with Barnaby Joyce and Minchin we might find real leadership and Comrade K Rudd gets rolled. www.smh.com.au/national/turnbull-threatens-to-dump-rebels-20091120-iqv2.htmlEdit 1 And if the media does due diligence and looks at where the funding comes and goes we may have a real can of worms and pandoras box opened. Eg the site activist cash details links and follow the money trail
|
|
|
Post by steve on Nov 20, 2009 14:35:52 GMT
The real question is for our AGW believing friends: are you now ready to question the credibility of the idea that the world is facing an apocalypse driven by CO2? If I wasn't questioning it, I wouldn't be here. PS. Jurinko, would you mind removing that photo. You have no evidence that this person was culpable, and he's an IT person not a scientist, so exposing him in such away seems a bit inappropriate.
|
|
|
Post by poitsplace on Nov 20, 2009 14:44:38 GMT
I agree with steve...for all we know he's the one that was kind enough to provide the files
|
|
|
Post by magellan on Nov 20, 2009 14:47:06 GMT
The real question is for our AGW believing friends: are you now ready to question the credibility of the idea that the world is facing an apocalypse driven by CO2? If I wasn't questioning it, I wouldn't be here. Those of us referring to the major players in the AGW climate "science" community who control the data and dissemination of information as fraudsters appear to be vindicated. It's a good ole boy network with an agenda, no two ways about it. Lubos Motls puts it quite bluntly: motls.blogspot.com/2009/11/hacked-hadley-cru-foi2009-files.htmlRead it. The conclusion looks pretty clear. These people should be put in jail as soon as possible. You know, these are not just small tricks in an academic discussion. These people have acquired millions if not billions of taxpayers' money by methods that seem to be provably fraudulent.
|
|