Posted by
Catmman on Friday, November 20, 2009 6:14:25 PM
Real Climate is a pro-AGW (man-made global warming) outfit.
Earlier today, it was revealed a hacker 'hacked' a database at the CRU (East Anglia Climate Research Unit - sometimes referred to as the Hadley CRU) revealing e-mails and other data which
could show these particular 'climate scientists' may have been conspiring to falsify climate data to fit pre-conceived, pro-AGW models and theory.
It should be stated that apparently one of the authors of these e-mails, Dr. Phil Jones has verified their authenticity. Right now it is unknown if this isn't a complete fabrication or hoax, or if these e-mails are indeed evidence of at least some fraudulent activity and attempt at covering it up. The fact that Dr. Jones has himself verified the e-mails, and that pro-AGW websites like Real Climate have begun to spin the revelations of from the e-mails tells me that they are probably accurate.
The initial spin is that these e-mails and other information was obtained and released illegally and this is the point which should be given attention - not the content of the material itself.
I would counter that if this situation were being played out in court, the issue of how the information was obtained would matter. Though hacking and releasing purported 'private' information may be shady, in the context of the content of the material or the debate it is fostering on the Internet is irrelevant.
Yes, there are idiosyncracies between scientists. They do things differently sometimes. But in this case,
analysis of just some of the released information shows that there may indeed be a coordinated effort to scew climate data, influence peer reviewers and scientific editors, and delete incriminating e-mails so they cannot be accessed through any type of FOIA request for verification by 'skeptics' or others.
"Sunshine is the best disinfectant" as the saying goes.
Real Climate should be more concerned about what could be questionable or even nefarious action by so-called climate scientists trusted with finding and disseminating the truth - as opposed to how the information was obtained. If the hacking was indeed illegal, then let it be dealt with as the law allows. But it does not excuse the possible unethical or even illegal activities of the subjects in the e-mails.
Science is supposed to be about the truth, not ideology.