Common Paradox Tech Blog

Several readers noted the latest fallout from the Climate Research Unit’s Climategate: the admission by the University of East Anglia that the raw data behind important climate research was discarded in the 1980s, “a time when climate change was seen as a less pressing issue” according to the Times (UK) article. The Telegraph quotes Phil Jones, beleagured head of the CRU: “Our global temperature series tallies with those of other, completely independent, groups of scientists working for NASA and the National Climate Data Centre in the United States, among others. Even if you were to ignore our findings, theirs show the same results. The facts speak for themselves; there is no need for anyone to manipulate them.” Some of the data behind these other results can likely be found in a new resource that jamie located up at the Real Climate site: a compilation of links to a wide variety of raw data about climate. From the former link: “In the aftermath of the CRU email hack, many people have come to believe that scientists are unfairly restricting access to the raw data relating to the global rise in temperature. … We have set up a page of data links to sources of temperature and other climate data, codes to process it, model outputs, model codes, reconstructions, paleo-records, the codes involved in reconstructions etc.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia keeps some of the most accurate climate records which are key to many climate change debates. Its email archives were hacked, and now it’s the center of another conspiracy claim.

As soon as the email archives’ contents were made publicly available, arguments broke out. Was there proof of data manipulation that could flip the entire climate debate topsy-turvy? Were scientists at the university working to keep works by climate skeptics out of journals? Answers to either question are unclear. According to New Scientist, there was no evidence of actual data manipulation, but some of the email exchanges could be construed as attempts to suppress some research.

No matter how those questions wind up being resolved, in the end the trouble doesn’t seem to be in the contents of the emails or in the data, but in the fact that the Climate Research Unit restricted access to the climate data to those it deemed “bona fide researchers.” Maybe some of the accusations the unit faced could’ve been avoided had the data been more freely shared in the first place. [New Scientist]

Photo by coda

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that a series of hacked emails and documents that were recently posted on Wikileaks are causing quite a stir in the scientific community. All told, more than 1,000 emails and 2,000 documents were stolen from the Climate Research Unit in East Anglia University in the U.K. “The emails include discussions of apparent efforts to make sure that reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations group that monitors climate science, include their own views and exclude others. In addition, emails show that climate scientists declined to make their data available to scientists whose views they disagreed with. [] Phil Jones, the director of the East Anglia climate center, suggested to climate scientist Michael Mann of Penn State University that skeptics’ research was unwelcome: We ‘will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!’ Neither man could be reached for comment Sunday.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.