Climategate thirty years in the making timeline banner

download

of 15

Embed Size (px)

description

Climategate Thirty Years in The Making Timeline Banner This is One Spectacular Poster of ClimateGate Covering 3 DecadesYou have to see this up close to believe it. Look up close and admire the detail while you despair at how long science has been going off the rails. To better appreciate the past and what was exposed by the CRU emails, the Timeline chart consolidates and chronologically organizes the information uncovered and published about the CRU emails by many researchers along with some related contextual events. That the chart exists at all is yet another example of how skilled experts are flocking in to the skeptics position and dedicating hours of time pro bono because they are passionately motivated to fight against those who try to deceive us.

transcript

  • 1.Apr 12 1999Sep 22 1999Apr 12, 2006 May 31 2007 Nov 15 2008Oct 28, 2009Feb 2003 - Sep 2009 SETT NG THE STAGE FOR H GH DRAMA AND NTR GUETHE WALL STREET JOURNAL, "CLIMATE OF FEAR: GLOBAL-WARMING ALARMISTS INTIMIDATE A CL MATOLOGY CONSP RACY FRUSTRATE SKEPTICS PEER REVIEW BIDS: MISSION ACCOMPLISHEDWIKIPEDIAS CLIMATE DOCTORJun 1988 DISSENTING SCIENTISTS INTO SILENCE," BY RICHARD LINZDEN, ALFRED P. SLOAN Mar 7, 1996 - Nov 12, 2009n "C ma ega e Par 2 A 2 000 page ep c o sc ence and skep c sm " Terence PROFESSOR OF ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE AT MIT: "The CRU e ma s have evea ed how he no ma conven ons o he pee ev ew p ocessFROM "How to Manufacture a Climate Consensus" by Patrick J. Michaels:CLIMATEGATE: 30 YEARS IN THE MAKING"[Climate modeler and realclimate.org co-founder William] Connolley took control of all things climate inWMO AND UNEP ESTABLISH THE Corcoran exp a ns how BR FFA and MANN bu heads over BR FFA S appea o have been comp om sed by a eam* o g oba wa m ng sc en s s w h he w ng"People who didnt toe Messrs. Wigley, Mann and Joness line began to PERIOD COVERED BY CRU E-MAILSthe most used information source the world has ever known -- Wikipedia. Starting in February 2003, justINTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON or hcom ng paper n wh ch he "dec ded o men on unce a n es n ee ng da a"Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and coope a on o he ed o o he n e na ona ou na o C ma o ogy C G enn McG ego Theexperience increasing difficulty in publishing their results. This happened towhen opposition to the claims of the band members were beginning to gel, Connolley set to work on theJun 4, 2003Mar 31, 2004CLIMATE CHANGE (IPCC). OTHER DOCUMENTS AND DATA FILES GO BACK TO wh e push ng he need o mo e wo k " 0923937760 x themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse...." "Henk Tennekes was dismissed as research eam spen nea y a yea p epa ng and pub sh ng a pape ha a emp ed o ebu ame [Patrick J. Michaels] and to the University of Alabamas Roy Spencer, who alsoWikipedia site. He rewrote Wikipedias articles on global warming, on the greenhouse effect, MAY 31, 1991 (AS PER THE FILES LAST EDIT DATE) REVIEWING PAPERS CRITICAL OF OWN WORKJONES "REVIEWS" MORE PAPERSdirector of the Royal Dutch Meteorological Society after questioning the scientific underpinnings of globalp ev ous y pub shed pape n C wh ch had shown ha he PCC mode s ha p ed c ed hypothesized that global warming is likely to be modest. Others surely stopped Corcoran exp a ns ha BR FFA was "s ugg ng w h Russ an ee ng esu s and he on the instrumental temperature record, on the urban heat island, on climate models, onCRITICAL OF HIS OWN WORK warming.... Respected Italian professors Alfonso Sutera and Antonio Speranza disappeared from the debate ins gn can "g oba wa m ng" n ac a ge y d sag eed w h he obse va ona da a " 147 trying, tiring of summary rejections of good work by editors scared of theepo s o Russ an sc en s s on he d cu es The nd ngs o en con ad c ed he deaglobal cooling. On Feb. 14, he began to erase the Little Ice Age; on Aug. 11, the Medieval COOK asks BRIFFA for help to put down a paper 1991, apparently losing climate-research funding for raising questions...." "And then there are the peculiarmob." [79]"A LITTLE TRUTH REPELS MUCH FALSEHOOD, JUST AS A LITTLE FIRE BURNS A LOT OF WOOD."ha he wo d s wa me oday han hund eds o even housands o yea s ago Re a ve yWarm Period. In October, he turned his attention to the hockey stick graph. He rewrote articles on the hes reviewing that is critical of BRIFFAS own work:JONES: "Recently rejected two papers (one forstandards in place in scientific journals for articles submitted by those who raise questions about accepted climate1 h gh numbe o ees has been no ed du ng 750 1450 A D The e s no ev dence o politics of global warming and on the scientists who were skeptical of the band. Richard Lindzen and Fred JGR and for GRL) from people saying CRU has it FROM "More evidence of gatekeeping" by Bishop Hill: "It is exactly as we feared. wisdom. At Science and Nature, such papers are commonly refused without review.... However, even when such -- HAZRAT ALI (D. 661) INTRIGUE Jun 12, 1996 un 17 1998 Apr 19, 1999mov ng po a mbe ne n he no h du ng he as cen u y w o e Rash Hann em ov Singer, two of the worlds most distinguished climate scientists, were among his early targets, followed by Apr 24, 2003 COOK: "Review- confidential REALLY URGENT" - wrong over Siberia. Went to town in bothAug 3, 2007Aug 5, 2009 If I [Arthur Rorsch] were to submit an article from a friendly colleague who wanted to papers are published, standards shift. When I, with some colleagues at NASA, attempted to determine how clouds om Russ a n Oc obe 1998 0907975032 xmp y ng ha wa m ng has beenothers that the band especially hated, such as Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas of the Harvard-Smithsonian- "Now something to ask from you.... I got a paper reviews, hopefully successfully. If either appears I publish in a scientific journal, we would always get a rejection; without proper WALL STREET JOURNAL, "A MAJOR DECEPTION OF GLOBAL WARMING,"MANN COMES ON BOARD " L KE THE DEA NCLUDE ME N"BRADLEY: NO CONSENSUS EVEN AT CRU, OUST EDITORS THAT PUBLISH PAPERS YOU DONT LIKEbehave under varying temperatures, we discovered what we called an Iris Effect ... Normally, criticism of papers OPERATION NEW SCIENTIST MAGAZINE ENSURING FAVORABLE REVIEWSINTERFERENCE WITH PEER REVIEW PROCESS TO SUPPRESS RESEARCH common n he pas and no h ng unusua was happen ng odayCenter for Astrophysics, authorities on the Medieval Warm Period." [109] (Also see [111].) to review (submitted to the Journal of Agricultural, will be very surprised, but you never know withargumentation. I was not the only Dutch researcher that happened to. Climate skeptics BY FREDERICK SEITZAND WE ARE NOT GATEKEEPERSappears in the form of letters to the journal to which the original authors can respond immediately. However, inJEOPARDIZING THE "CONSENSUS" ABOUT AGW (ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBALFrom "C ma ega e Par 1 A 2 000 page ep c o sc ence and skep c sm" WIGLEY explains to JONES, HULME and CARTER strategies forBiological, and Environmental Sciences), written by aGRL." [1080742144.txt]: The British magazine New Scientist readies two editorials critical of the IPCC.JONES and FOSTER (copies to TRENBERTH, MANN, SALINGER, SCHMIDT, and everywhere ran into brick walls." [85] "The e e ence o 750 1450 wou d appea o suppo he ong he d sc en c v ew on he"Connolley created or rewrote 5,428 unique Wikipedia articles and was granted a senior editorial this case (and others) a flurry of hastily prepared papers appeared, claiming errors in our study, with ourWARMING OR MAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING)"This IPCC report, like all others, is held in such high regard largely because it has been peer- BRADLEY is so offended by some comments of ousting the editor of Climate Research, which has published papers Korean guy and someone from Berkeley, that claims that Jan 21, 2005Within days, EYSTEIN JANSEN (coordinating lead author (CLA) of the others) discuss FOSTERS recommendations for reviewers the Journal of Geophysical"Wha ea y ocked he pa eoc ma e wo k a CRU and u ma e y shook heex s ence o a Med eva Wa m Pe od ha m gh have been ho e han he 20 h cen u yand administrative status at Wikipedia that enabled him to delete over 500 articles and barred responses delayed months and longer. The delay permitted our paper to be commonly referred to as discredited. reviewed. That is, it has been read, discussed, modified, and approved by an international body MANN that he titles this e-mail "CENSORED!!!!!". they dont agree with [1051190249.txt]:the method of reconstruction that we use inFROM [85]: "One of those rejected paperspaleoclimate chapter in 2007 IPCC Report) gets pre-publication copies, and e-Research requires for a paper hes submitted. They recommend colleagues who JONES: "You are probably aware of this, but the journal Sonja edits [Energy & A coup e o weeks a e ano he Russ an Eugene Vaganov w o e n a pape say ng hamore than 2000 Wikipedia contributors who ran afoul of him." [110] CONNOLLEYSTHREATEN GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS JOURNALIndeed, there is a strange reluctance to actually find out how climate really behaves." [98] of experts. These scientists have laid their reputations on the line. But, this report is not what it PCC was a seem ng y ou o he b ue ema 0898099393 x on une 17 He also makes clear that there is no consensusdendroclimatology (reverse regression) is wrong, biased, about Siberian temperatures may have been bymails RICHARD DOMERVILLE, inviting the other CLAs to join a campaign"know the sorts of things to say," despite JGRs rules (actually quoted in the e-mail)Environment] is at the very bottom of almost all climate scientists lists of journals to read. A STORY OF INTRIGUE, DECEPTION AND SECRECY WHOS WHO [8,38] appears to be -- it is not the version that was approved by the contributing scientists listed on the1998 om M chae Mann o Ph ones hen head o Eas Ang a s CRU cen e even among UEA/CRU scientists, and doesnthe wa m ng n he m dd e o he 20 h cen u y s no ex ao d na y The wa m ng a he administrator status was revoked by Wikipedia in September, 2009 for his involvement in anWIGLEY: "PS Re CR [Climate Research], I do not know the best way tolousy, horrible, etc. They use your Tornetrask recon me [Lars Kamel]. The time is about right. I got itHUGHES, MANN, WIGLEY, BRADLEY, JONES, BRIFFAagainst New Scientist. prohibit this. See {WEGMAN REPORT 14.Jul.2006}. It is the journal of choice of climate change skeptics and even here theyBe o e hen no men on had been made n he ema cache o M chae Mannbo de o he 1s and 2nd m enn a was ongeand s m a n amp udeunrelated dispute. [112]handle the specifics of the editoring. Hans von Storch is partly to blame -- heas the main whipping boy.... If published as is, rejected because of nonsense from a reviewerand SCHMIDT discuss what