Hackers Break Into Climate Change Research Center, Leak Email

What an inconvenient truth! Hackers broke into a prominent climate change research center in the UK and leaked internal memos and documents that is fanning the flames in the debate over man-made climate change. Al Gore was not available for comment.

In one leaked e-mail, the research center's director, Phil Jones, writes to colleagues about graphs showing climate statistics over the last millennium. He alludes to a technique used by a fellow scientist to "hide the decline" in recent global temperatures. Some evidence appears to show a halt in a rise of global temperatures from about 1960, but is contradicted by other evidence which appears to show a rise in temperatures is continuing.

Al does not approve.

Whoops

/sits back in chair and waits for spin

The the only way to get real answers is hacking these days it seems like. A meteor came so close not that long ago and it was huge. It could have killed us all and no one said anything. Its like the movie 2012 where they don't tell anyone until its too late. I bet thats gonna happen. We'll all die without warning while the head hanchos of the world go into an ark or space ship.

This is what we're going to see when it comes lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xlIw_PCT-Y

Yeah, people seem to forget that "research" on both sides is biased based on who is paying the bills. There aren't any unbiased researchers.

I'm sure unbiased researchers exist, just not in any sizeable numbers

and i'd like to see all the findings from this hack to see how falsified any data was or was not

Originally Posted by kirbyrj

Yeah, people seem to forget that "research" on both sides is biased based on who is paying the bills. There aren't any unbiased researchers.

I agree. By the time they leave grad school, if not sooner, they are already corrupted. It seems researchers look for evidence to support their own or their employers desired result and ignore anything that does not support it. It's politically or financially motivated bad science masquerading as uncorrupted good science most of the time.

wow thats annoying linking the title back to the forum post where the hell is the actual article

Actually the article is misleading. If you look at the leaked emails the scientists at the CRU basically say they're not sure if the data from NASA and other outside agencies is to be 100% trusted due to different testing methods/etc.

Originally Posted by kirbyrj

Yeah, people seem to forget that "research" on both sides is biased based on who is paying the bills. There aren't any unbiased researchers.

With enough funds, you can "prove" that global warming is real, or that it's not. The truth probably lies somewhere in between, as always.

This very topic was being discussed in a climate-related thread on SlashDot. I liked this reply because it both explains the 'trick', and the sensationalist response to it.

Originally Posted by Laxitive (10360)

Response from the RealClimate website, here (http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...ack/#more-1853):

This will indeed cause certain people to "wonder". Especially people who do not have the faculties to properly understand the idiomatic uses of the English language, and people who are willing to take words and phrases of out of context, as well as people who are willing to formulate their opinions without considering the actual analysis and instead relying on secondhand hysteria generated by others who are also not willing to consider the actual analysis.

So it goes.

-Laxitive

Originally Posted by Pyroja

This very topic was being discussed in a climate-related thread on SlashDot. I liked this reply because it both explains the 'trick', and the sensationalist response to it.

Thank-you for linking that, now I can wait for next 100 posts that don't bother doing any reading on their own and respond to the headlines.

Originally Posted by EchtoGammut

Thank-you for linking that, now I can wait for next 100 posts that don't bother doing any reading on their own and respond to the headlines.

Your going to wait. Are you a glutton for punishment.

Nowadays global warming has become something you either just trust scientists on, or you get labeled an idiot. There are charts showing temperature going up the last 100 years; a few decades ago there were charts showing the temperature going down in the last 100 years.

Ironically some of the things most associated with global warming now were actually blamed for the sudden cooling trend that had scientists worried between the 1940s and 1970s. They blamed aerosols. They were very insistent back then too that if mankind didn't change our ways, and fast, we'd be dooming ourselves quickly. Look up "Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols: Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate" released in 1971." Here's a quote of the dire circumstances of the time: "could decrease the mean surface temperature (of Earth) by as much as 3.5 C. If sustained over a period of several years, such a temperature decrease could be sufficient to trigger an ice age!" 188 member states and territories came together in 1979 for the WMO conference to discuss what the world could do to reverse the cooling trend.

It's just important to remember - science can be surprising. People including scientists can believe something, and claim to have all the data to support it, and then still be completely wrong. Then later people look back and think "People REALLY used to believe that? Boy, they were idiots back then. Not like today, we're enlightened now."

this is all a scam to get you to pay the same if not more for cleaner renewable energy sources as they become more availible, the goverments are just making up for the taxs that are going to be lost when petrol gets phased out, they need those taxes to live the high life.

Originally Posted by Conker

The the only way to get real answers is hacking these days it seems like. A meteor came so close not that long ago and it was huge. It could have killed us all and no one said anything. Its like the movie 2012 where they don't tell anyone until its too late. I bet thats gonna happen. We'll all die without warning while the head hanchos of the world go into an ark or space ship.

This is what we're going to see when it comes lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xlIw_PCT-Y

It's all business. Many profited immensely from gullible idiots after turning them into hippies using the "global warming" fears. As you can see, something like a meteor has no place in business yet.

Well in America, if they don't make something sound serious/important, shit don't get done. Everything gets exaggerated in order to light flames under their ass. Sure, climate change isn't as bad as they say but we have to start worrying about post-internal combustion some time and now is the time to start so in 100 years we have all the technology we need then instead of 100 years after that.

Originally Posted by Conker

This is what we're going to see when it comes lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xlIw_PCT-Y

GET TO DA CHOPPAHHHHH

RUUNNNNNNNN

GGOOOOOOOOOOOO

Originally Posted by kirbyrj

Yeah, people seem to forget that "research" on both sides is biased based on who is paying the bills. There aren't any unbiased researchers.

Originally Posted by GORANKAR

I agree. By the time they leave grad school, if not sooner, they are already corrupted. It seems researchers look for evidence to support their own or their employers desired result and ignore anything that does not support it. It's politically or financially motivated bad science masquerading as uncorrupted good science most of the time.

I've heard this argument more and more on the internet, and I find it quite disturbing. You honestly don't think that some scientists pride themselves on being as objective as possible? As a scientist myself I cringe whenever someone alludes to all scientists being biased and untrustworthy. A lot of people also seem to think that scientists get payed based on their results; and at most universities, it just doesn't work like that. You submit a grant proposal, then you get the grant. You actually get payed BEFORE any actual research gets done. Where is the incentive to lie?

In training to be a scientist, I was taught to accept the data, no matter what I wanted to believe. A rigid background in sound scientific inquiry and scientific morality is required to become a respected researcher. When people insult my profession by saying, "There aren't any unbiased researchers" I take deep offense. I pride myself on following the data, admitting uncertainties, and separating observation from interpretation. Without a rigid set of morals, science cannot proceed, and the truth can never be reached. We'd all just sit around trying to think of new ways to skew data to what we want to believe, and no progress would be made. We'd be no better than intelligent design people.

Obviously there are immoral people out there, and I wouldn't be surprised if some scientists were trying to profit from this, however they are the exception - not the rule.

Originally Posted by Ualdayan

Nowadays global warming has become something you either just trust scientists on, or you get labeled an idiot. There are charts showing temperature going up the last 100 years; a few decades ago there were charts showing the temperature going down in the last 100 years.

Ironically some of the things most associated with global warming now were actually blamed for the sudden cooling trend that had scientists worried between the 1940s and 1970s. They blamed aerosols. They were very insistent back then too that if mankind didn't change our ways, and fast, we'd be dooming ourselves quickly. Look up "Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols: Effects of Large Increases on Global Climate" released in 1971." Here's a quote of the dire circumstances of the time: "could decrease the mean surface temperature (of Earth) by as much as 3.5 C. If sustained over a period of several years, such a temperature decrease could be sufficient to trigger an ice age!" 188 member states and territories came together in 1979 for the WMO conference to discuss what the world could do to reverse the cooling trend.

It's just important to remember - science can be surprising. People including scientists can believe something, and claim to have all the data to support it, and then still be completely wrong. Then later people look back and think "People REALLY used to believe that? Boy, they were idiots back then. Not like today, we're enlightened now."

Still, CO2 levels have tripled due to the sudden release of previously-sequestered carbon reserves. If the past is the key to the present, then it will affect the climate. The debate is over how much, and what mechanisms will act to either mitigate or extenuate the change.

Cliff's:

1. Guys with agenda break into research laboratory
2. Said guys steal documents, comb through them until they find something trollworthy
3. Journalists who don't know what theyr'e talking about react with crazy-ass stories (as usual)
4. ...profit?