Saturday, November 21 08:00 pm Hackers have attacked the servers of the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia University and published data that they say proves global warming is a hoax. The unnamed hackers stole over 1,000 e-mails and 3,000 documents relating to climate research over the last ten years and have posted excepts online. Many of the published information will add fuel to sceptics who say scientists are making up data about global warming. The volume of material published and its piecemeal nature makes it impossible to confirm what proportion is genuine, said the university in a statement.. We took immediate action to remove the server in question from operation and have involved the police in what we consider to be a criminal investigation. The university has said that the attack was most likely carried out to influence the U.N. climate conference in Copenhagen that is being held next week and the data released is misleading. The following email, which I can confirm is genuine, has caused a great deal of ill-informed comment, but has been taken completely out of context and I want to put the record straight,said Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit. "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." The first thing to point out is that this refers to one diagram - not a scientific paper - which was used in the World Meteorological Organisation's statement on the status of the global climate in 1999 (WMO-no.913). The diagram consisted of three curves showing 50-year average temperature v ariations for the last 1000 years. Each curve referred to a scientific paper and a key gives their details. Climate records consist of actual temperature records from the mid-19th century and proxy data (tree rings, coral, ice cores, etc) which go back much further. The green curve on the diagram included proxy data up to 1960 but only actual temperatures from 1961 onwards. This is what is being discussed in the email. The word 'trick' was used here colloquially as in a clever thing to do. It is ludicrous to suggest that it refers to anything untoward. Nevertheless climate change deniers are claiming that the emails are proof that scientists are conspiring to push climate change irrespective of facts. The posting of private data files from the Climatic Research Unit in England reveals the sleazy, unseemly side of a number of the leading scientific proponents of global warming alarmism, including CRU Director Phil Jones, Michael Mann, Ben Santer, and Kevin Trenberth, said Myron Ebell, director of Energy and Global Warming Policy from the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which is partially funded by energy companies. It is clear that some of the worlds leading climate scientists, as they are always described, are more dedicated to promoting the alarmist political agenda than in scientific research. Some of the e-mails that I have read are blatant displays of personal pettiness, unethical conniving, and twisting the science to support their political position.                                                                                                                                                                             

Great post geez...that certainly nudged a brain cell or three...just makes me wonder what part they're actually playing with the lies + deceit, to boost the 1 big scam that insiduosly surrounds r lives...                                                                                                                                                                             

  I figure climate change must get worse, we can't keep using energy and expect it to last, it's not finite.   As most things come and go in cycles then it stands to reason that the world will end again and start again, only glad that I won't be alive to experience it.                                                                                                                                                                                  

you hit the nail on the head there kwak,everything comes and goes in cycles.earth warms up and cools down again in cycles,always has done                                                                                                                                                                             

This is the trouble these days deciding between fact and fiction !!

Do agree tho we cant just keep going willy nilly and expect nothing to ever change
                                                                                                                                                                             

I'm with you Kwak - not sure there's gonna be a whole lot left in years to come.                                                                                                                                                                              

Dunno about global warming,overpopulation is what worries me! sooner or later somethings got to give.                                                                                                                                                                             

this issue is on newsnight now.                                                                                                                                                                              

  I missed it, what did they say Blues?                                                                                                                                                                              

Basically, you had one bloke sayin that the e-mails were out of context   and another bloke sayin we need an investigation.                                                                                                                                                                               

Ah the usual 2 men who cant agree ....................                                                                                                                                                                              

I've always thought it was borrox. Its such a handy thing to tax after all. and who funds most of the research? The Govt!   Dr David Bellamy has always claimed that it isn't man made and that the earth is just going though a natural cycle, we are still coming out of the last iceage.   Ever since he claimed that he has been banned from the BBC because they decided to jump on the bandwagon.   They will soon find something "enviromentally freindly" to tax..like how many worms you have in the garden or how muuch bird poo your car attracts.   Time for Guy Forkes to come back.                                                                                                                                                                             

I too am sceptical about climate change and doubt how much effect human activity is having on a natural cycle. Some of the 'Greens' seem to have a (not so well) hidden agenda against motor vehicles and would like to see some kind of feudal system established where we live, work, shop and are entertained within a 5-mile radius so that we can walk or cycle everywhere. And as has already been suggested, the Government gets to make on it by so-called Green taxes.

Of course the most damaging human activities are overpopulation as excalibur suggests and the cutting down of rain forests which are an important natural resource that is likely to have much more effect on how much CO2 goes into the atmosphere than motor vehicles produce. However, these aren't fashionable topics any more when energy use is taxable.

Have to agree. The green issue is so clouded by political, and other vested interests, that it's impossible to know the true position. (if anyone really knows)   There's little doubt that we have a negative impact overall, regardless of any natural cycles, and so should welcome any genuine efforts to reduce that impact.   It would be good to think that each generation left the world in a better state, not worse, for the generations that follow.                                                                                                                                                                             

Good points being made!   ghosty - still trying to find the truth about David Bellamy as me and my bro want to use his image on some t-shirts and I want to be as informed as possible before I contact him for permission.   As exc said, population control has to be exercised (which has previously been handled by mass disease, natural disasters or wars). Maybe the 'eco-warriors' could start the ball rolling by not breeding?   Unfortunately governments worldwide now see the 'eco' argument as a cash cow and will milk it until death.   Above all, remember the Earth will survive and heal itself... it is humanity they are 'trying' to save. The question you have to ask yourself is if it is really worth saving?                                                                                                                                                                             

TC humanity has to be worth saving or else why exist at all                                                                                                                                                                              

some say that about wasps jackie,whats the point of them?does there really have to be a point?                                                                                                                                                                             

and another thing,around 80% (I think thats right) of all species that have existed are now extinct.Dinosaurs had their go and are now gone(unless of course you count the birds)other things have come and gone long before we showed up so what gives us the right to believe we will be here forever??

90% of the time we breed because of the process,unlike the animal kingdom, and why is it that the most poverty stricken nations are the biggest culprits? any answers anyone? 
                                                                                                                                                                             

Every living thing on the planet has a purpose and a reason for being, human arrogance makes us believe we are most worthwhile creature to inhabit but alas would we exist without the things around us?  And unless we preserve them we are endangering our own existance are we not?

But still if you have no future to look forward to then why bother and would anarchy not rule?