HadleyCRU says leaked data is real
The director of Britain’s leading Climate Research Unit, Phil Jones, has told Investigate magazine’s TGIF Edition tonight that his organization has been hacked, and the data flying all over the internet appears to be genuine.

In an exclusive interview, Jones told TGIF, “It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads of data files and emails.”

“Have you alerted police”

“Not yet. We were not aware of what had been taken.”

Jones says he was first tipped off to the security breach by colleagues at the website RealClimate.

“Real Climate were given information, but took it down off their site and told me they would send it across to me. They didn’t do that. I only found out it had been released five minutes ago.”

TGIF asked Jones about the controversial email discussing “hiding the decline”, and Jones explained what he was trying to say….

From: http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_briefing_room/2009/11/hadleycru-says-leaked-data-is-real.html

The breaking story at CAudit, WuWT and Lucia:

http://rankexploits.com/musings/2009/real-files-or-fake/

http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7801#comments (see further down)

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/19/breaking-news-story-hadley-cru-has-apparently-been-hacked-hundreds-of-files-released/

should be an interesting day – hoax or implosion?

If mass home ownership killed socialism, why hasn’t mass car ownership killed environmentalism? Is it because socialism is only workable as a genuinely popular mass movement, whereas environmentalism can be propelled by a tiny privileged elite?

I agree.

With the degree of scientific uncertainty re AGW, and the failure of the climate models to reflect reality why do so many political leaders of centre right parties embrace the doomsday scenarios ? Here in NZ, (with a centre right government) where we produce 0.02% of the world’s CO2 output we are seriously considering an emmissions trading scheme.

The conspiracy minded among us have to think that there are deep dark forces at play behind the scenes. Otherwise why spend billions of dollars needlessly ?

After all, the warmist is just the newest manifestation of a well-established social type – the Glastonbury hippy, the woolly-hatted folk singer, the tree-hugging vegan – only this time waving a graph from a UN thinktank. In his previous avatars he was a much-loved, much-ridiculed component of the social scene. Now he is sitting on government quangoes planning our future for decades to come; and not a stand-up comic in the country (let alone a politician) will dare to raise a voice to question this state of affairs.

Your “space-between” analytical framework is presumably used in a therapeutic context to treat people whose “deep-ecological” psyche has rendered them socially dysfunctional. But what if society changes in such a way that the psychically dysfunctional works only too well?

Luke and I both coincidentally came across the same deep eco type (see our exchange at:
omniclimate.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/changing-climate-changing-people-hollywood-conference-videos/
This young Anglo-american found enlightenment on a Tibetan mountaintop among people whose only source of power was a parabolic mirror focussed on a sooty kettle. He’s obviously barking mad, but he’s off to Copenhagen as part of our youth delegation, before taking a PhD in Environmental Sciences at Oxford. How dysfunctional is that?
He won’t be needing psychological treatment any time soon. Meanwhile we rationalists will be lining up to march behind Jeremy Clarkson and Delingpole of the Telegraph. Don’t we need our heads examined?

An Asimovian-type robot if running just one law – the precautionary principle – would have destroyed the stromatolites which led to the creation of our oxygen rich atmosphere.

Cyanobacteria use water, carbon dioxide, and sunlight to create their food. The {byproducts} ‘evil pollutants’ of this process are oxygen and calcium carbonate (lime).

Much of the content of environmental belief is centred around the conviction that the external world (the space beyond the believing self) is not good-enough for him (or her) to exist in. Indeed, pretty much all the written material produced by those who collude in the ‘environmental’ project – with its preoccupations with sustenance and endings – boils down to countless variations of this one assertion… that “the modern world (unlike the old one) is not good-enough for me”.

This presupposes on the claimant’s part a system of measurement – if the outside modern world does not measure up to the self (and whatever his felt needs are) then it is less ‘good’ than he internally considers himself to be. And if the world is not a good-enough place for him to use – then abusing it (and the people it contains) simply becomes an outward expression of his own ‘goodness’ in this state-of-mind.

That the modern world is a good-enough place for most of us to get by in, begs the question of what it would need to become to meet the demands of the ‘Green’ self? By submitting to his demands, would the world become too-good for anyone else to make use of? In other words, would a too-good mother-earth have the same consequences as a too-good real mother – and prevent anyone from ever growing up?

It’s like the ‘need to have a need’ meaning that someone’s needs can never be met.

For a live mini-case history of the ’space in-between’ issue, see:

http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2009/11/whom_should_i_attack.php

where the quoted allusion is to “Republican obstructionists, anti-government extremists, and right-wing conspiracy mongers”

The Stoat has, to be fair to him, been likened to the witchfinder general of AGW for his extensive wikpedia work so I can understand he is miffed by skeptics. However, I always found him to be very honest and willing to attack stupidity on both sides, but the conversations there and at linked blog’s like Eli’s have been so intellectually flawed in relation to expertise and scientific method that I had to comment a few times.

I mean it should never be “whom?” (and I’m not going Lynn Truss on you) but “what?” – “stupidity and bad science” would be the short answer. So clearly there is some polarisation, however lightly we should take blogs.

I ‘believe’ I’ve not said anything trollish – in fact I would have expected a comment for my “men who glare at stoats” link, which is genuinely funny and not linked to AGW in any way, but their policy now is to just ignore me. I wonder if there’s a kind of Turing-test for blog posts to parse them for their political leanings? If there was I think mine would all have gone undetected since I try not to make this a political issue.

The ultimate irony was when he then posted the volcano photo, which I’d already seen and had noted had created at least 3 different ‘expert’ interpretations of the facts around a very basic ‘climate’ system.

Finally, this paper is interesting in relation to belief:

http://www.reasonproject.org/images/uploads/contest/Harris_Kaplan_2009.pdf

Imagine a debate (any debate) where people had these scans being done during it.

But a Green’s beliefs may be justified. Put another way, a person may be justified in holding ‘green’ beliefs.

If the person has reached a conclusion that his life is unliveable in the modern world, then we can expect the beliefs he chooses will justify that state of mind – rather than challenge it. It may be that his current life really is one that is not worth living… but it might be his beliefs, or his incontinent believing, that make it so.

If this is a Green vicious cycle we can begin to see the paradox… the only thing that appears to make such a person’s life feel that it is worth living – is protesting that it isn’t!

BTW this figure http://icecap.us/images/uploads/ANNUALCO2.jpg and the Joe D’Aleo story at icecap looks interesting in the light of the Plimer thing. I don’t vouch for the article’s content, just it appears that there’s low delta CO2 in the volcano years, and a high in 1998 under an ENSO warm. But I find it difficult to take that kind of pdf seriously – when I see pasted in low res screenshots and poor referencing I have to say I worry more than a little.