Attribution and Misattribution
10 hours ago
Showing posts with label jones. Show all posts
Showing posts with label jones. Show all posts
2010/11/16
2010/10/27
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?????
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?????
2010/03/17
Jones v McIntyre
http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2009/08/
Why does McIntyre want the data?
...But McIntyre insists hat he’s not interested in challenging the science of climate change, or in nit-picking; rather he is simply asking that the “data be made available”.
...He’s especially aggrieved by the fact that hurricane expert Peter Webster at Georgia Tech University was recently provided with data that had been refused to him. McIntyre’s point here is that he should be treated as a legitimate academic given his background and publication record
But Webster points out that he was allowed access because of the nature of his request, which was very specific and will result in a joint publication with Phil Jones. “Reasonable requests should be fulfilled because making data available advances science”, says Webster, “but it has to be an authentic request because otherwise you’d be swamped".
Once the data become publicly available, Jones wants McIntyre to produce a global temperature record. “Science advances that way. He might then realize how robust the global temperature record is”, says Jones. Asked if he would take on the challenge, McIntyre said that it’s not a priority for him, but added “if someone wanted to hire me, I’d do it”.
====================
So McIntyre does not want the data he just wants others unamed to have the data.
Webster got the data because it will result in a joint Jones Webster publication.
seems different conditions to me
Why does McIntyre want the data?
...But McIntyre insists hat he’s not interested in challenging the science of climate change, or in nit-picking; rather he is simply asking that the “data be made available”.
...He’s especially aggrieved by the fact that hurricane expert Peter Webster at Georgia Tech University was recently provided with data that had been refused to him. McIntyre’s point here is that he should be treated as a legitimate academic given his background and publication record
But Webster points out that he was allowed access because of the nature of his request, which was very specific and will result in a joint publication with Phil Jones. “Reasonable requests should be fulfilled because making data available advances science”, says Webster, “but it has to be an authentic request because otherwise you’d be swamped".
Once the data become publicly available, Jones wants McIntyre to produce a global temperature record. “Science advances that way. He might then realize how robust the global temperature record is”, says Jones. Asked if he would take on the challenge, McIntyre said that it’s not a priority for him, but added “if someone wanted to hire me, I’d do it”.
====================
So McIntyre does not want the data he just wants others unamed to have the data.
Webster got the data because it will result in a joint Jones Webster publication.
seems different conditions to me
2010/03/05
Attack on Jones
A dump of a post I made at CA in case it gets deleted
thefordprefect
Posted Mar 5, 2010 at 7:15 AM | Permalink | Reply“I have no pity for him. His situation is his own fault.”
What!!!!!
The noise generated by an email from jones where he quipped about someones (natural) death (“In an odd way this is cheering news !” Jones did not wish him ill) and now you say Jones deserves what he gets.
His research results are comparable to 2 others. How can you suggest it has been falsified? Where’s your evidence? Where’s your justification for wishing him ill?
Do you honestly think that 10s of thousands of scientists are colluding in a gigantic fraud, and not one of them, their co-workers, their secretaries, etc. etc. (perhaps 100,000s people) has seen the light and shown a single statement that confirms this conspiracy to defraud?
Remember, Some of the death threats Jones (and others presumably) get will be from readers of this and watts blog.
It disgusts me that someone who has been researching climate for 30 years should be treated this way. His mental suffering was evident from the hearing video.
How can YOU justify hounding a human being to the point that he contemplates suicide?
Global Warming will not destroy the human race, but the vilification of climate researchers makes me wonder if it is worth saving any way.
A very saddened and disgusted, Mike
“We’re getting a handful of nasty emails coming and requests for comments on other
blog sites. One email has gone to the University Registrar because of the language used.
Keith had one that said he was responsible for millions of deaths! Even one reading far
too much into his off ill message.
Even though I’ve had loads of FOIs and nasty emails, a few in the last 2 days have
been the worst yet. I’m realizing more what those working on animal experiments must
have gone through.
Cheers
Phil”
Makes you proud to be human doesn’t it.
--------------
RomanM
Posted Mar 5, 2010 at 8:36 AM | Permalink | ReplyRemember, Some of the death threats Jones (and others presumably) get will be from readers of this and watts blog.
I see this as a very serious allegation against myself and other regular commentators at this site. I would suggest that you either provide some evidence to support this or withdraw the statement.
Sending threats of causing harm to someone is a vile and despicable act. Making an unfounded accusation that I am part of a group of individuals that will do that is irresponsible at best
--------------
Please note I did not mean contributors here as McIntyre usually reigns comments in. In fact there are probably millions of readers at these sites and only a few contribute. I'm sure you will admit that they will have gaioned information from these blogs and some will consequently have written "strong" messages to AGW researchers.
However:
Why was a whole thread pulled at CA a year(?) ago?
From Watts
Lemon (11:01:28) :
I have no more sympathy for these fools than I had for Siegried & Roy after the lion attacked. Play with fire…
Their death might save trillions of dollars and millions of lives
Chemist (16:48:18) :
I’ll be the one to say it: I hope they die so that their deaths will draw attention to the truth of this issue. If they succeed, then it will be just another propaganda piece. With their deaths, they can bring actual change by allowing the world to industrialize
There are others But these are still on the web site.
-------------
Rachelle Young (20:52:54) :
I would be content to see all three of them freeze to death or be eaten by ‘endangered’ polar bears. That would teach the world something.
thefordprefect
Posted Mar 5, 2010 at 7:15 AM | Permalink | Reply“I have no pity for him. His situation is his own fault.”
What!!!!!
The noise generated by an email from jones where he quipped about someones (natural) death (“In an odd way this is cheering news !” Jones did not wish him ill) and now you say Jones deserves what he gets.
His research results are comparable to 2 others. How can you suggest it has been falsified? Where’s your evidence? Where’s your justification for wishing him ill?
Do you honestly think that 10s of thousands of scientists are colluding in a gigantic fraud, and not one of them, their co-workers, their secretaries, etc. etc. (perhaps 100,000s people) has seen the light and shown a single statement that confirms this conspiracy to defraud?
Remember, Some of the death threats Jones (and others presumably) get will be from readers of this and watts blog.
It disgusts me that someone who has been researching climate for 30 years should be treated this way. His mental suffering was evident from the hearing video.
How can YOU justify hounding a human being to the point that he contemplates suicide?
Global Warming will not destroy the human race, but the vilification of climate researchers makes me wonder if it is worth saving any way.
A very saddened and disgusted, Mike
“We’re getting a handful of nasty emails coming and requests for comments on other
blog sites. One email has gone to the University Registrar because of the language used.
Keith had one that said he was responsible for millions of deaths! Even one reading far
too much into his off ill message.
Even though I’ve had loads of FOIs and nasty emails, a few in the last 2 days have
been the worst yet. I’m realizing more what those working on animal experiments must
have gone through.
Cheers
Phil”
Makes you proud to be human doesn’t it.
--------------
RomanM
Posted Mar 5, 2010 at 8:36 AM | Permalink | ReplyRemember, Some of the death threats Jones (and others presumably) get will be from readers of this and watts blog.
I see this as a very serious allegation against myself and other regular commentators at this site. I would suggest that you either provide some evidence to support this or withdraw the statement.
Sending threats of causing harm to someone is a vile and despicable act. Making an unfounded accusation that I am part of a group of individuals that will do that is irresponsible at best
--------------
Please note I did not mean contributors here as McIntyre usually reigns comments in. In fact there are probably millions of readers at these sites and only a few contribute. I'm sure you will admit that they will have gaioned information from these blogs and some will consequently have written "strong" messages to AGW researchers.
However:
Why was a whole thread pulled at CA a year(?) ago?
From Watts
Lemon (11:01:28) :
I have no more sympathy for these fools than I had for Siegried & Roy after the lion attacked. Play with fire…
Their death might save trillions of dollars and millions of lives
Chemist (16:48:18) :
I’ll be the one to say it: I hope they die so that their deaths will draw attention to the truth of this issue. If they succeed, then it will be just another propaganda piece. With their deaths, they can bring actual change by allowing the world to industrialize
There are others But these are still on the web site.
-------------
Rachelle Young (20:52:54) :
I would be content to see all three of them freeze to death or be eaten by ‘endangered’ polar bears. That would teach the world something.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
