SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
1,126
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 144:
Line 144: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Line 158:
Line 174: +
→Ethics Breaches
Tim, Phil, Keef: I suggest a way out of this mess. Because of the complexity of the arguments involved, to an uniformed observer it all might be viewed as just scientific nit-picking by "for" and "against" global warming proponents. However, if an "independent group" such as you guys at CRU could make a statement as to whether the M&M effort is truly an "audit", and if they did it right, I think that would go a long way to defusing the issue... a quick and forceful statement from The Distinguished CRU Boys would help quash further arguments, although here, at least, it is already quite out of control.....yesterday in the US Senate the debate opened on the McCain-Lieberman bill to control CO2 emissions from power plants. Sen Inhofe stood up & showed the M & M figure and stated that Mann et al--& the IPCC assessment --was now disproven and so there was no reason to control CO2 emissions.....I wonder how many times a "scientific" paper gets reported on in the Senate 3 days after it is published.... Ray[http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2011/12/yipes-as-climate-hoax-insiders-struggle.html]}}
Tim, Phil, Keef: I suggest a way out of this mess. Because of the complexity of the arguments involved, to an uniformed observer it all might be viewed as just scientific nit-picking by "for" and "against" global warming proponents. However, if an "independent group" such as you guys at CRU could make a statement as to whether the M&M effort is truly an "audit", and if they did it right, I think that would go a long way to defusing the issue... a quick and forceful statement from The Distinguished CRU Boys would help quash further arguments, although here, at least, it is already quite out of control.....yesterday in the US Senate the debate opened on the McCain-Lieberman bill to control CO2 emissions from power plants. Sen Inhofe stood up & showed the M & M figure and stated that Mann et al--& the IPCC assessment --was now disproven and so there was no reason to control CO2 emissions.....I wonder how many times a "scientific" paper gets reported on in the Senate 3 days after it is published.... Ray[http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2011/12/yipes-as-climate-hoax-insiders-struggle.html]}}
{{cquote|Sexing-up evidence is so easy to do, isn't it?
>
> Reading your letter in the EDP today makes me wonder who your source inside
> the Tyndall Centre was supplying you with such exaggerated evidence?
> Surely it wasn't me, was it? Treating Dick Lindzen with the esteem of flat-
> earthers; could this claim have been inserted by politicians seeking to make a
> dramatic point to their audience? Or was it really what the experts in the Tyndall
> Centre think? Perhaps we need an enquiry.
>
> Don't worry - I'm not thinking of committing suicide should I be exposed
> as the source of this story; but then again, it couldn't have been me, could it?
> I didn't say that after all; all I said was that we are well aware of Dick Lindzen and his arguments (in fact, Dick Lindzen is a pretty smart meteorologist who just takes a more cautious view of the scientific evidence for human causes of global warming; similar in caution in some ways to David Kelly even).
>
> Yes, sexing-up is so easy to do. Be warned.
>
> Mike[http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2011/11/warmist-mike-hulme-evidence-is-so-easy.html]}}
{{cquote|From: Joseph Alcamo <alcamo@usf.uni-kassel.de> To: m.hulme@uea.ac.uk, Rob.Swart@rivm.nl Subject: Timing, Distribution of the Statement Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:52:33 0100 Reply-to: alcamo@usf.uni-kassel.de
{{cquote|From: Joseph Alcamo <alcamo@usf.uni-kassel.de> To: m.hulme@uea.ac.uk, Rob.Swart@rivm.nl Subject: Timing, Distribution of the Statement Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 18:52:33 0100 Reply-to: alcamo@usf.uni-kassel.de
Timing -- I feel strongly that the week of 24 November is too late. 1. We wanted to announce the Statement in the period when there was a sag in related news, but in the week before Kyoto we should expect that we will have to crowd out many other articles about climate. 2. If the Statement comes out just a few days before Kyoto I am afraid that the delegates who we want to influence will not have any time to pay attention to it. We should give them a few weeks to hear about it. 3. If Greenpeace is having an event the week before, we should have it a week before them so that they and other NGOs can further spread the word about the Statement. On the other hand, it wouldn't be so bad to release the Statement in the same week, but on a diffeent day. The media might enjoy hearing the message from two very different directions.
Timing -- I feel strongly that the week of 24 November is too late. 1. We wanted to announce the Statement in the period when there was a sag in related news, but in the week before Kyoto we should expect that we will have to crowd out many other articles about climate. 2. If the Statement comes out just a few days before Kyoto I am afraid that the delegates who we want to influence will not have any time to pay attention to it. We should give them a few weeks to hear about it. 3. If Greenpeace is having an event the week before, we should have it a week before them so that they and other NGOs can further spread the word about the Statement. On the other hand, it wouldn't be so bad to release the Statement in the same week, but on a diffeent day. The media might enjoy hearing the message from two very different directions.
---------------------------------------------------- Prof. Dr. Joseph Alcamo, Director Center for Environmental Systems Research University of Kassel Kurt Wolters Strasse 3 D-34109 Kassel Germany[http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2011/11/1997-email-to-uea-mike-hulme-good.html]}}
---------------------------------------------------- Prof. Dr. Joseph Alcamo, Director Center for Environmental Systems Research University of Kassel Kurt Wolters Strasse 3 D-34109 Kassel Germany[http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2011/11/1997-email-to-uea-mike-hulme-good.html]}}
==Censorship==
==Censorship==
{{cquote|We want to avoid any accusation that you are trying to get people fired because they disagree with you. Best, Annie...Annie Ogden, Head of Communications, University of East Anglia
{{cquote|We want to avoid any accusation that you are trying to get people fired because they disagree with you. Best, Annie...Annie Ogden, Head of Communications, University of East Anglia