More pointless attacks on Jones.

http://climateaudit.org/2010/10/27/did-jones-delete-emails/

Did Jones Delete Emails?
It turns out that Muir Russell didn’t bother asking, since that would have exposed Jones to potential liability.

But in a surprising new turn of events, it seems that VC Acton sort-of did what Muir Russell was supposed to do – ask Jones whether he had deleted emails. The Guardian reports Acton’s testimony as follows:

Prof Phil Jones told the University of East Anglia’s boss that he did not delete any of the emails that were released from the university last November, despite apparently saying he would in one of those emails.
In the narrowest sense, the very existence of the Climategate emails seems to show that, whatever Jones may or may not have attempted to do, he had not deleted the emails that survived on the back up server.


thefordprefect
Posted Oct 27, 2010 at 2:46 PM | Permalink | ReplyKeep trying with the irrelevancies McIntyre.

You may be able to change the result of a midterm election and perhaps the next climate debate in Mexico. But attacking a man will not change the fact that the world is warming and it is more than likely caused by man. I hope you are correct in your stance for I would not be able to live with myself if I (and watts) have helped to wreck the lives of our children.

Mike

Even if Jones was guilty of all that watts and McIntyre claim, just what is the relevance. His CRUTEMP record has been shown to agree with other records.
These all show a temperature rise greater than elsewhere in the instrumental record. What is the point in continuing this horrendous attack on Jones and Mann?

my post today:
So lets see if I have this correct [you claim]

Jones acted illegally
Muir Russell and co workers are incompetent
Oxburgh and co workers are incompetent
The UK Parliamentary Process has been bought by lefties
The UEA is complicit in all this illegality

Hmmmm £1300 is all it costs to bring a defamation action (it costs lawyer/QC costs to defend your innocence, and you ARE guilty until you can show otherwise. A Norwich Pharmacal will provide your names and addresses from your ISP for free!). Living outside UK does not make you immune to prosecution. I hope you have plenty of evidence that proves (legally!!!) all your comments. Good Luck!

your words:
mpaul
Posted Oct 28, 2010 at 9:59 AM | Permalink | ReplyJones was the head of the unit. He was directing people to delete emails that were subject of a FOIA.

geronimo
Posted Oct 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM | Permalink | ReplyRussell has form, he’s a serial incompetent

JEM
Posted Oct 29, 2010 at 9:42 AM | Permalink | ReplyOne would think that if the Russell cabal’s ineptitude

McIntyre
It is almost impossible to fully dissect the negligence of the Muir Russell inquiry

T G Watkins
Posted Oct 28, 2010 at 4:45 PM | Permalink | ReplyI have every confidence in the British system of Parliamentary inquiries. Confident that they will duck and dive,
John Whitman
Posted Oct 27, 2010 at 10:56 AM | Permalink | ReplyAm I just being naïve to think that any reasonable independently minded person will find doubt about the innocence of the UEA/CRU personnel
just a few more defamations:Steve McIntyre
Posted Oct 26, 2010 at 7:54 PM | Permalink | ReplyOne of the undiscussed aspects of Muir Russell is the role of PR firm Luther Pendragon and its employees Mike Granatt and Kate Moffatt. The latter is profiled here as having also assisted Pew Charitable Trusts. All very “objective”, I’m sure.

and:
Who Recommended Oxburgh?

most of:
Fiona Fox and the Babe Magnet

etc. etc.

[most of this post got snipped making it ridiculous!]

thefordprefect
Posted Oct 30, 2010 at 8:03 PM | Permalink | ReplyMcIntyre
You have stopped any form of scientific investigation on CRU science.
You are now single mindedly going after its personnel. I just do not see the purpose.

As far as I am aware the main contention about the science is the hide the decline (the graphic on the front of a simple WMO pamphlet).

You now seem to going after the inclusion of some research in the IPCC document that should not have been included due to it not having been published in time. Not because the SCIENCE was wrong.
This blog now seems to be a “lets destroy the UEA and especially the CRU” mouthpiece.

The FOI act became law in 2005, 3 years before the destroy the email email. Was Jones educated in FOI by this time?

The University system in the UK is being destroyed in this country by its poor funding. Sowing seeds of doubt about the UEA may have very detrimental effects on its financial and hence physical future.

Very sad. Just what is the purpose here?????