One of the leading Climategate researchers, Dr. Phil Jones, is “standing aside” as Director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Great Britain while an independent review board investigates the case. Jones has earned an internationally infamous reputation as the author of several incriminating e-mails hacked from a CRU server in November, among them one stating he “just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e. from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.” The UEA announced Jones’ temporary departure in a press release published on the university’s website.

Jones denies any wrong-doing associated with the e-mails, stating he and his colleagues have always been “scrupulous in ensuring that our science publications are robust and honest.” UEA officials defend Jones, claiming the e-mails are “taken out of context and misinterpreted” and saying the conclusion that CRU manipulates data is “entirely unfounded.” In regard to his hiatus, Jones claims, “What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible,” promising he will support the review process. His cooperation will be necessary since some of the e-mails indicate he illegally dodged Freedom of Information (FOI) requests for CRU data. Again, Jones claims innocence because the FOI requests were for data from meteorological services and “this information is not ours to give without … permission.”

UEA Vice-Chancellor Edward Acton announced that details of the independent inquiry will be released soon. Dr. Benny Peiser, director of the British-based Global Warming Policy Foundation, published a Daily Mail article on the GWPF website urging the university to “come clean.” He said, “If they try to set up some kind of whitewash panel with an inquiry that does not have the total trust of the public it will make matters worse.”

While skeptics accuse him of conspiracy in concealing and manipulating data, Jones has fired his own accusations of conspiracy against the unidentified hacker(s). He doubts it is a coincidence the e-mails were published just prior to the UN Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen, Denmark, from December 7 – 18. “This may be a concerted attempt to put a question mark over the science of climate change in the run-up to the Copenhagen talks,” he said in a CRU press release. Climate-change skeptics happily agree that the scandal could undermine plans scheduled for debate in Copenhagen to establish a global eco-goverment.

Lord Christopher Monkton of the Science and Public Policy Institute wrote, “The whistleblower deep in the basement of one of the ugly, modern tower-blocks of the dismal, windswept University of East Anglia could scarcely have timed it better.” In his November 30 paper entitled "Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!" (pdf), Monckton delivers a thorough review of the hacked e-mails. He says they prove that Jones and his colleagues conspired in a number of ways to promote their political agenda by concealing and manipulating data for pragmatic and financial gain, excluding “inconvenient” data from IPCC reports, and preventing publication of independent research that disagreed with their conclusions.

Jones is not the only prominent IPCC researcher in the Climategate spotlight. PennState University has announced it will conduct its own investigation into Professor Michael Mann’s participation in the e-mails. The university otherwise refuses to discuss the matter publicly until its internal investigation is complete. Its statement indicates support of Mann as a “highly regarded member of the … faculty” whose research is respected and “sound.” As a result, critics are already questioning the objectivity of the Penn State investigation.

Related articles:

Climategate: George Monbiot's Lament

Congress Launches Climategate Investigation

IPCC Researchers Admit Global Warming Fraud

Climategate: E-mail Scandal Could Melt Copenhagen Plans

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (8)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Michael Santomauro said:

Lies, d**ned lies, and statistics Lies, d**ned lies, and statistics The falsification of data and the conspiracy to commit same etc, constitutes serious criminal activity. Further, the granting of public funds for research warrants a federal investigation. I’m hoping the perpetrators, including possibly Professor Michael Mann, director of Pennsylvania State University’s Earth System Science Centre and a regular contributor to the popular climate science blog Real Climate, and their facilitators will be tracked down and prosecuted to the fullest extent the law allows. — Michael Santomauro

December 02, 2009 | url

jallen said:

Perversion of the Scientific Method Consider - The emails were not a result of a hacker's activity. They were also not going to be produced under a FOIA request. Rather, they are the residual emails comprising those which had already been *sanitized* from the CRU systems to illegally prepare an incomplete reponse for a future (likely successful) FOIA request. Note that there is a very small percentage of personal chatter that typically make up close colleague's communication. Therefore, it points to a previous culling. Theory: These are deleted emails from a sanitized batch which were foolishly or purposely archived and/or discovered by an insider (perhaps the sanitizer himself). The insider or whistleblower then had pangs of conscience or an axe to grind and released them surreptitiously. Any data that did not corroborate the pre-conceived conclusion was presumed to be false. Instead, the model is assumed to be correct and the data is assumed to be in error. However, data fabrication and algorithm manipulation are not the only important issues here: The travesty is that they were peer-reviewing each other's work! They had control of their own process. It was a closed-loop system comprised of several dozen researchers in an incestuous, self-affirming academic relationship.

December 02, 2009

Flu-Bird said:

Green nazis This whole enviromental movment is based on lies,junk science,fruad,and decite the facts that RACHEAL CARSONS book SILENT SPRING was based wholy on junk science and DDT wasnt harming the birds as she claimed now we have have WEST NILE VIRUS,MALARIA, and other sickness becuase of the lies of carson

December 02, 2009

Phil W said:

couldn't happen to a nicer...... pick from the list: -liar -fraud -scumbag -add yours here

December 03, 2009

Flu-Bird said:

Liar liar BIRDS AND HUMANS HAVE DIED BECUASE RACHEAL CARSON LIED

December 03, 2009

kenno said:

Sad Day for Science and Scientists We have to go back to square one with the Climate Research. We cannot believe one word these shyster scientists have published. First we have Briffa manipulating data to make the Hockey Stick chart. We have Mann's hockey stick chart PROVEN to be a lie. Now we have Jones, et al, destroying the data, manipulating the data to produce the result they want. Manipulating other researchers to prevent opposing view points and research from being presented in peer reviewed journals. Refusing to follow the law with FOIA requests. This is a serious issue and we need to cleanse all American Universities doing Climate research, because we seriously cannot trust any of these dishonorable scientists.

December 12, 2009 | url

Ken V said:

about Monkton's evaluation Lord Monkton's evaluation of the E-mails is very, very intense. But as a long time Fortran programmer, I can tell you that a "comment" line in Fortran code starts with the letter 'C' in column 1. REM is a comment in the BASIC language. I hope he can clarify so his entire article cannot be discarded.

December 12, 2009

Bill Brewer said:

... That's "Bankruptcy that you can believe in!"

December 19, 2009