Hey ! forget about that Copenhagen summit global warming is all fraud.

yeswecan:

Hey ! forget about that Copenhagen summit global warming is all fraud.

Really. Didn't you just learn today that the Maldives may soon be fully under water. Is that fraud too. Don't go the ultra Evangelical conservative way. it is wrong and UN-Godly abi.

naliakar:

Really. Didn't you just learn today that the Maldives may soon be fully under water. Is that fraud too. Don't go the ultra Evangelical conservative way. it is wrong and UN-Godly abi.

Didn't you hear of the leaked email document that proves the so-called scientist actually knew earth is getting cooler? This is just another scientific myth. I will get back to you tomorrow

naliakar:

What exactly is at stake and what should we expect from the conference?

naliakar:

Really. Didn't you just learn today that the Maldives may soon be fully under water. Is that fraud too.  Don't go the ultra Evangelical conservative way. it is wrong and UN-Godly abi.

Is Global Warming a Fraud - YES

Is Earth's Climate changing - YES

Why is it changing - NATURAL CYCLE THAT HAS SIGNIFICANTLY LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH HUMANS

Do you mean it also changed even when we did not have the kind of technologies we have today - YES

Is Sea level possibly rising - YES

Who is causing it - NO

Is it Humans - NO

What is causing it - THE SUN

What is the evidence for this - CLIMATE CHANGE IS ALSO OCCURING ON A FEW OTHER PLANETS IN OUR SOLAR SYSTEM AND THERE ARE SCIENTIFIC DATA COLLECTED AS REGARDS THE EFFECT OF THE SUN

Is there evironmental pollution - YES

Is pollution the same thing as Global Warming - NO 

So why is there Global Warming Conference - CAUSE ITS ALL ABOUT MONEY I.E. CARBON TAX AND ITS ALSO A MEANS TO STIFFLE THE DEVELOPMENT OF MOST NON-EUROPEAN DOMINATED COUNTRIES.

Is Global Temperatures increasing - NO IT IS NOT INCREASING

Is the email scandal about Global Warming true - YES IT IS

So what is the big deal about the email scandal - ITS A BIG DEAL CUS THE LOCATION OF THE EMAIL SCANDAL IS ALSO THE SAME LOCATION PROVIDING A SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF THE DATA USED TO SUPPORT GLOBAL WARMING.

Are there simple ideas about Global Temperature variation - YES


http://www.longrangeweather.com/

http://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm

Why are they scared of the debate? the whole global warming project has been religionised to the extend opposer s are treated as extremist, I remember when 30 thousand scientists (9,000 PHD inclusive) sued for an open debate and they were turned down. Hm this is indeed another conspiracy theory,

Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after 'Danish text' leak

Developing countries react furiously to leaked draft agreement that would hand more power to rich nations, sideline the UN's negotiating role and abandon the Kyoto protocol



The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.


The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.


The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark [where's Russia?] – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.


The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol's principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.


The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".


A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries also seen by the Guardian shows deep unease over details of the text. In particular, it is understood to:

• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;
• Divide poor countries further by creating a new category of developing countries called "the most vulnerable";
• Weaken the UN's role in handling climate finance;
• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.


Developing countries that have seen the text are understood to be furious that it is being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion in the negotiations.


"It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process," said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.


Antonio Hill, climate policy adviser for Oxfam International, said: "This is only a draft but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurting. On every count the emission cuts need to be scaled up. It allows too many loopholes and does not suggest anything like the 40% cuts that science is saying is needed."

Hill continued: "It proposes a green fund to be run by a board but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN. That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks."


The text was intended by Denmark and rich countries to be a working framework, which would be adapted by countries over the next week. It is particularly inflammatory because it sidelines the UN negotiating process and suggests that rich countries are desperate for world leaders to have a text to work from when they arrive next week.


Few numbers or figures are included in the text because these would be filled in later by world leaders. However, it seeks to hold temperature rises to 2C and mentions the sum of $10bn a year to help poor countries adapt to climate change from 2012-15.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/08/copenhagen-climate-summit-disarray-danish-text

No2Atheism:

Is Global Warming a Fraud - YES

Is Earth's Climate changing - YES

Why is it changing - NATURAL CYCLE THAT HAS SIGNIFICANTLY LITTLE OR NOTHING TO DO WITH HUMANS

Do you mean it also changed even when we did not have the kind of technologies we have today - YES

Is Sea level possibly rising - YES

Who is causing it - NO

Is it Humans - NO

What is causing it - THE SUN

What is the evidence for this - CLIMATE CHANGE IS ALSO OCCURING ON A FEW OTHER PLANETS IN OUR SOLAR SYSTEM AND THERE ARE SCIENTIFIC DATA COLLECTED AS REGARDS THE EFFECT OF THE SUN

Is there evironmental pollution - YES

Is pollution the same thing as Global Warming - NO 

So why is there Global Warming Conference - CAUSE ITS ALL ABOUT MONEY I.E. CARBON TAX AND ITS ALSO A MEANS TO STIFFLE THE DEVELOPMENT OF MOST NON-EUROPEAN DOMINATED COUNTRIES.

Is Global Temperatures increasing - NO IT IS NOT INCREASING

Is the email scandal about Global Warming true - YES IT IS

So what is the big deal about the email scandal - ITS A BIG DEAL CUS THE LOCATION OF THE EMAIL SCANDAL IS ALSO THE SAME LOCATION PROVIDING A SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF THE DATA USED TO SUPPORT GLOBAL WARMING.

Are there simple ideas about Global Temperature variation - YES


http://www.longrangeweather.com/

http://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm

The chart and supportive arguments are a strong testament to the so called natural climatic cycles in recorded human history. On that score, I lack the confidence for an equally informed rebuttal-at least for now. What I wish to know from you is whether or not the cycles you graphically present above were, at any one time, interrupted by the injection into the atmosphere of such vast quantities of carbon emissions as obtains in the current dispensation. Is it possible that the sense of immediacy of global warming is contingent upon a new element injected into Earth's atmosphere in unprecedented proportion. If so , does it render the substance of the data you present null?

Billygoat:

Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after 'Danish text' leak

Developing countries react furiously to leaked draft agreement that would hand more power to rich nations, sideline the UN's negotiating role and abandon the Kyoto protocol



The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.


The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.


The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark [where's Russia?] – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.


The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol's principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.


The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".


A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries also seen by the Guardian shows deep unease over details of the text. In particular, it is understood to:

• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;
• Divide poor countries further by creating a new category of developing countries called "the most vulnerable";
• Weaken the UN's role in handling climate finance;
• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.


Developing countries that have seen the text are understood to be furious that it is being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion in the negotiations.


"It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process," said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.


Antonio Hill, climate policy adviser for Oxfam International, said: "This is only a draft but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurting. On every count the emission cuts need to be scaled up. It allows too many loopholes and does not suggest anything like the 40% cuts that science is saying is needed."

Hill continued: "It proposes a green fund to be run by a board but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN. That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks."


The text was intended by Denmark and rich countries to be a working framework, which would be adapted by countries over the next week. It is particularly inflammatory because it sidelines the UN negotiating process and suggests that rich countries are desperate for world leaders to have a text to work from when they arrive next week.


Few numbers or figures are included in the text because these would be filled in later by world leaders. However, it seeks to hold temperature rises to 2C and mentions the sum of $10bn a year to help poor countries adapt to climate change from 2012-15.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/08/copenhagen-climate-summit-disarray-danish-text

Billy Goat
What a name

At some point, one has to seriously consider the array of covert ways through which the West, doubling up as the North tries to maintain power asymmetries into perpetuity. Recalling Friedman's The World is Flat, it is expected that the equalizing processes of the global community as carried out through the UN and other unilateral agencies, is not what the industrialized North wishes for and so such a conspiracy is to be expected.

Well the name comes from the children's tale, "Billy Goat Gruff."  As I can sometimes be counted on to be a Gruff old man.  I think the problem is that there are way more politician than there are smart people to fill the positions available.  Therefore, we elect and chose people who appeal physically to us rather than people who are the most suited for the job.  We tend to want our leader to be Handsome and dashing rather than deep thinkers who are well read but perhaps a bit ugly.

yeswecan:

Why are they scared of the debate? the whole global warming project has been religionised to the extend opposer s are treated as extremist, I remember when 30 thousand scientists (9,000 PHD inclusive) sued for an open debate and they were turned down. Hm this is indeed another conspiracy theory,

No Atheism
The leaked emails are a Russian design to counter any changes that might cap emission rates. They only tell part of the story.

naliakar:

No Atheism
The leaked emails are a Russian design to counter any changes that might cap emission rates. They only tell part of the story.

. . . Will you please stop that 

. . . please don't insult my intelligence. . . .I have tried my best to be as polite as possible, hence I would appreciate that:YOU PLEASE DO NOT INSULT MY INTELLIGENCE

What you just said is complete and utter western propaganda . . . certian reports already confirm that the emails are genuine . . . hence it is distasteful to try to create doubts as regards the emails instead of questioning the Global Warming Scam itself.

Edit:

I really do not understand this kind of mentality we have in Africans (assuming you are an African) at times . . . .do you even realise that you are trying to justify something that has been confirmed.

- It is an open secret that the CRU was blocking all attempts to reveal and review their data.
- It is an open secret that the CRU was fiddling with their data.

Hence it is blatantly insulting to all intelligent people for you to even insinuate that Russians did bla bla bla . . .

YOU KNOW WHAT . . . BUY YOUR CARBON CREDITS AND FEEL HAPPY . . . I THINK I YOUR STATEMENT IS JUST MAKING ME TO LOSE MY TEMPER

. . . WHAT EXACTLY IS WRONG WITH WE AFRICANS . . . CAN'T WE HAVE INDEPENDENT THOUGHTS FOR GOODNESS SAKE.


It is already written, people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.


------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHECK THE FOLLOWING LINKS FOR NEWS REPORT RELATING TO THE CONFIRMATION THAT HACKED EMAILS WERE GENUINE

[url]http://www.examiner.com/x-28973-Essex-County-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m11d20-CRU-director-admits-hacked-files-genuine[/url]

No2Atheism:

http://www.australianclimatemadness.com/?p=1557

No Atheism.

[people engaged in a debate don't shout like ill-mannered untethered children. Posting links does not constitute proof because in the current discourse on climate warming either side has a point to put across. For every link "of proof you put out there about the emails, I could more than equalize with contrary info so do not play righteous. On the Russian connection, you can be skeptical as you should when neutral issues such as climate are taken captive by ideological interest. That is the true mark of intelligence.

I asked you a simple question how the incremental emissions of carbon into the atmosphere in the wake of expanding global industrialization factors in the anti-global warming theory. You chose to be mute on that one.

So listen, stop being gratuitous as playing petulance and read some more: here is a much more recent link on the story and there are many more.

Were Russian security services behind the leak of 'Climategate' emails?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1233562/Emails-rocked-climate-change-campaign-leaked-Siberian-closed-city-university-built-KGB.html#
By Will Stewart and Martin Delgado
Last updated at 1:29 PM on 06th December 2009



Suspicions were growing last night that Russian security services were behind the leaking of the notorious British ‘Climategate’ emails which threaten to undermine tomorrow’s Copenhagen global warming summit.

An investigation by The Mail on Sunday has discovered that the explosive hacked emails from the University of East Anglia were leaked via a small web server in the formerly closed city of Tomsk in Siberia.

The leaks scandal has left the scientific community in disarray after claims that key climate change data was manipulated in the run-up to the climate change summit of world leaders.
Sergei Kirpotin

Sergei Kirpotin of Tomsk University warned that the melting of the peat bogs in Siberia is 'an ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climactic warming'

The row erupted when hundreds of messages between scientists at the university’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and their colleagues around the world were placed on the internet along with other documents.

The CRU is internationally recognised as one of the most important sources of information on the rise in global temperatures.

Its data is relied on by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN body which co-ordinates the world response to climate change.



But now the CRU’s findings are under suspicion.

The leaked emails appear to show that CRU director Professor Phil Jones and colleagues attempted to manipulate the figures and hide their raw data from researchers with opposing views.

Prof Jones has stepped aside from his post while claims are investigated that he wanted certain papers excluded from the United Nations’ next major assessment of climate science.

Russia – one of the world’s largest producers and users of oil and gas – has a vested interest in opposing sweeping new agreements to cut emissions, which will be discussed by world leaders in Copenhagen tomorrow.

Russia believes current rules are stacked against it, and has threatened to pull the plug on Copenhagen without concessions to Kremlin concerns.

The Mail on Sunday understands that the hundreds of hacked emails were released to the world via a tiny internet server in a red brick building in a snow-clad street in Tomsk.
v

The Tomsk office from which emails may have been leaked

The original internet link was quickly removed after the information spread from it like wildfire on to international websites.

A message written in English accompanied the leaked package of emails. It read: ‘We feel that climate science is too important to be kept under wraps.

'We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code and documents. Hopefully it will give some insight into the science and the people behind it.’

Climate-change sceptics in the West seized on the emails as evidence that the books were being cooked by the global-warming lobby.

Stories highlighting the ‘scandal’ began to appear from November 21, three or four days after the information was first released on to the server. Some of the leaked emails date back to March, 1996.

Tomcity – the server – and Tomline, its parent company, were unavailable for comment yesterday.

The firm offers an internet security business to prevent hacking and bugs and the ‘compromising of confidential information’.

Other divisions of the firm are involved in laying the cable which provides high-speed internet access to companies in the Siberian city.

The server is believed to be used mainly by Tomsk State University, one of the leading academic institutions in Russia, and other scientific institutes.

Computer hackers in Tomsk have been used in the past by the Russian secret service (FSB) to shut websites which promote views disliked by Moscow.

Such arrangements provide the Russian government with plausible deniability while using so-called ‘hacker patriots’ to shut down websites.

In 2002, Tomsk students were said to have launched a ‘denial of service’ attack at the Kavkaz-Tsentr portal, a site whose reports about Chechnya angered Russian officials.

The FSB office in Tomsk put out a special Press release saying that what the students had done was a legitimate ‘expression of their position as citizens, one worthy of respect’.

A Russian hacking specialist said last night: ‘There is no hard evidence that the hacking was done from Tomsk, though it might have been.

'There has been speculation the hackers were Russian. It appears to have been a sophisticated and well-run operation, that had a political motive given the timing in relation to Copenhagen.’

And gazeta.ru news website, having received information about the Tomsk server connection, said: ‘Presumably it was Russian hackers who broke into the servers of the university.’

The university said that there was strict security on its server, heightening the theory that an extremely sophisticated hacking operation was carried out to obtain it.

East Anglia University has gone out of its way to promote itself to students from the former Soviet Union. Its website says that 33 Russian students currently study there.

It is not known if they have fallen under suspicion as part of the police investigation.
Tomsk – 2,190 miles east of Moscow – was closed to foreigners during the Soviet era.

Its population of 630,000 includes the secret satellite city of Seversk, formerly known as Tomsk-7 and seven miles to the north, which houses strategic uranium and plutonium plants and remains shut to Westerners.

It was built in the Fifties by 20,000 prisoners from nearby Siberian labour camps.

Today, the city, and especially Seversk, remains closely monitored by the FSB, the successor security service to the Soviet-era KGB.

The city’s academic quarter – some of which uses the server that revealed the climate-change scandal – includes a leading world expert on the subject, Professor Sergei Kirpotin, a botanist of Tomsk University.

He was unavailable yesterday and has not commented on the email controversy.

Previously, in research with academic Judith Marquand from Oxford University, he warned of the risk of the release of billions of tons of methane gas because of the melting of the Siberian peat bogs, seen as being due to global warming.

Kirpotin described the situation as ‘an ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climatic warming’.

Russia is the world’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and lags behind many Western countries in greening its industry.

However, its emissions plunged in the Nineties as its economy collapsed and it now sits on a treasure trove of unused carbon emission permits that could be sold to other countries.

These are due to expire in 2012 with the Kyoto Treaty. The Kremlin wants these to be rolled forward and last week signalled they would not sign a new deal without this, threatening the whole Copenhagen summit.

The crisis caused by the Climategate email row has resulted in the UK’s Met Office being forced to re-examine 160 years’ of climate data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made warming had been undermined by the leaks.

A new three-year analysis of the data will mean the Met Office – which works closely with Prof Jones’s unit – will not be able to declare with complete confidence the extent of global warming trends until the end of 2012.

The Norwich-based university has called in Sir Muir Russell, a former senior civil servant, to investigate the row, which is also the subject of a separate probe by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Last night, news of the Kremlin connection coincided with Norfolk Police confirming to The Mail on Sunday that it was now ‘investigating criminal offences’ in relation to the data breach.

Norfolk police sources said they were working with ‘other agencies’ on the inquiry. But they were unable to say if these included the British security services MI5 and MI6.

This newspaper has established, however, that Scotland Yard computer experts from its Central e-Crime unit are helping Norfolk officers track down the hacker responsible for the leaks.

A Norfolk Police spokeswoman said last night: ‘Norfolk Constabulary can confirm that it is investigating criminal offences in relation to a data breach at the University of East Anglia (UEA).’

The Mail on Sunday tracked down Professor Ross McKitrick, a world-renowned expert on the economic effects of climate change, who said Prof Jones had tried to stop his findings being published in an influential UN report.

Prof McKitrick concluded that Jones and his colleagues at the CRU had overstated the effects of greenhouse gas emissions on global temperatures by failing to take account of external factors linked to population growth and urbanisation.

The attempt to silence McKitrick was revealed in an email from Jones to a US colleague in 2004, when the UN was preparing for a major report by the IPCC.

After describing McKitrick’s findings as ‘garbage’ and dismissing another researcher’s work as inaccurate, Prof Jones wrote: ‘I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is! Cheers, Phil.’

‘Kevin’ is understood to refer to Dr Kevin Trenberth, a Jones ally and climate analyst at the National Centre for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

A spokesman for the University of East Anglia said last night: ‘A police inquiry is under way.’

Explore more:

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1233562/Emails-rocked-climate-change-campaign-leaked-Siberian-closed-city-university-built-KGB.html##ixzz0ZEtMQMMq

Why is the moderator locking out my rejoinder in this topic

On another note . . . please check the following diagrams to see how criminally intended data manipulation was done just to justify the Global Warming Scam . . .

image 1

image 2

So i beg you in the name of the Creator of Heaven and Earth . . . do not come at me with the "Russian" thingy . . .

- Its your choice and decision to believe in Global Warming . . . however what i would please like you to stop is to please not even attempt to discredit something that was confirmed to be true (yes I am talking about the hacked emails which you tried to discredit with your statement).


This would most probably be my last response to your post on this thread . . . cus I am really sick and tired of seeing people dogmatically following the Global Warming nonsense . . .even though raw scientific data contradicts goes against it.

HAVE A GOOD DAY.

No2Atheism:

image 2

I have carefully written and posted a rejoinder twice to your misplaced righteousness two postings above. For some reason each time I press to post I get a statement that the thread is locked. When I raise a simple statement such as this, it goes through. Until such a time that I am able to get my rejoinder through, I will assume non existence of you two last postings okay? A dialogue has to be a dialogue-twain and twain.

@NoAtheism.

People engaged in a debate don't shout like ill-mannered untethered children. Posting links does not constitute proof because in the current discourse on climate warming either side has a point to put across. For every link "of proof you put out there about the emails, I could more than equalize with contrary info so do not play righteous. On the Russian connection, you can be skeptical as you should when neutral issues such as climate are taken captive by ideological interest. That is the true mark of intelligence.

I asked you a simple question how the incremental emissions of carbon into the atmosphere in the wake of expanding global industrialization factors in the anti-global warming theory. You chose to be mute on that one.

So listen, stop being gratuitous as playing petulance and read some more: here is a much more recent link on the story and there are many more.

Were Russian security services behind the leak of 'Climategate' emails?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1233562/Emails-rocked-climate-change-campaign-leaked-Siberian-closed-city-university-built-KGB.html#
By Will Stewart and Martin Delgado
Last updated at 1:29 PM on 06th December 2009



Suspicions were growing last night that Russian security services were behind the leaking of the notorious British ‘Climategate’ emails which threaten to undermine tomorrow’s Copenhagen global warming summit.

An investigation by The Mail on Sunday has discovered that the explosive hacked emails from the University of East Anglia were leaked via a small web server in the formerly closed city of Tomsk in Siberia.

The leaks scandal has left the scientific community in disarray after claims that key climate change data was manipulated in the run-up to the climate change summit of world leaders.
Sergei Kirpotin

Sergei Kirpotin of Tomsk University warned that the melting of the peat bogs in Siberia is 'an ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climactic warming'

The row erupted when hundreds of messages between scientists at the university’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and their colleagues around the world were placed on the internet along with other documents.

The CRU is internationally recognised as one of the most important sources of information on the rise in global temperatures.

Its data is relied on by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN body which co-ordinates the world response to climate change.



But now the CRU’s findings are under suspicion.

The leaked emails appear to show that CRU director Professor Phil Jones and colleagues attempted to manipulate the figures and hide their raw data from researchers with opposing views.

Prof Jones has stepped aside from his post while claims are investigated that he wanted certain papers excluded from the United Nations’ next major assessment of climate science.

Russia – one of the world’s largest producers and users of oil and gas – has a vested interest in opposing sweeping new agreements to cut emissions, which will be discussed by world leaders in Copenhagen tomorrow.

Russia believes current rules are stacked against it, and has threatened to pull the plug on Copenhagen without concessions to Kremlin concerns.

The Mail on Sunday understands that the hundreds of hacked emails were released to the world via a tiny internet server in a red brick building in a snow-clad street in Tomsk.
v

The Tomsk office from which emails may have been leaked

The original internet link was quickly removed after the information spread from it like wildfire on to international websites.

A message written in English accompanied the leaked package of emails. It read: ‘We feel that climate science is too important to be kept under wraps.

'We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code and documents. Hopefully it will give some insight into the science and the people behind it.’

Climate-change sceptics in the West seized on the emails as evidence that the books were being cooked by the global-warming lobby.

Stories highlighting the ‘scandal’ began to appear from November 21, three or four days after the information was first released on to the server. Some of the leaked emails date back to March, 1996.

Tomcity – the server – and Tomline, its parent company, were unavailable for comment yesterday.

The firm offers an internet security business to prevent hacking and bugs and the ‘compromising of confidential information’.

Other divisions of the firm are involved in laying the cable which provides high-speed internet access to companies in the Siberian city.

The server is believed to be used mainly by Tomsk State University, one of the leading academic institutions in Russia, and other scientific institutes.

Computer hackers in Tomsk have been used in the past by the Russian secret service (FSB) to shut websites which promote views disliked by Moscow.

Such arrangements provide the Russian government with plausible deniability while using so-called ‘hacker patriots’ to shut down websites.

In 2002, Tomsk students were said to have launched a ‘denial of service’ attack at the Kavkaz-Tsentr portal, a site whose reports about Chechnya angered Russian officials.

The FSB office in Tomsk put out a special Press release saying that what the students had done was a legitimate ‘expression of their position as citizens, one worthy of respect’.

A Russian hacking specialist said last night: ‘There is no hard evidence that the hacking was done from Tomsk, though it might have been.

'There has been speculation the hackers were Russian. It appears to have been a sophisticated and well-run operation, that had a political motive given the timing in relation to Copenhagen.’

And gazeta.ru news website, having received information about the Tomsk server connection, said: ‘Presumably it was Russian hackers who broke into the servers of the university.’

The university said that there was strict security on its server, heightening the theory that an extremely sophisticated hacking operation was carried out to obtain it.

East Anglia University has gone out of its way to promote itself to students from the former Soviet Union. Its website says that 33 Russian students currently study there.

It is not known if they have fallen under suspicion as part of the police investigation.
Tomsk – 2,190 miles east of Moscow – was closed to foreigners during the Soviet era.

Its population of 630,000 includes the secret satellite city of Seversk, formerly known as Tomsk-7 and seven miles to the north, which houses strategic uranium and plutonium plants and remains shut to Westerners.

It was built in the Fifties by 20,000 prisoners from nearby Siberian labour camps.

Today, the city, and especially Seversk, remains closely monitored by the FSB, the successor security service to the Soviet-era KGB.

The city’s academic quarter – some of which uses the server that revealed the climate-change scandal – includes a leading world expert on the subject, Professor Sergei Kirpotin, a botanist of Tomsk University.

He was unavailable yesterday and has not commented on the email controversy.

Previously, in research with academic Judith Marquand from Oxford University, he warned of the risk of the release of billions of tons of methane gas because of the melting of the Siberian peat bogs, seen as being due to global warming.

Kirpotin described the situation as ‘an ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climatic warming’.

Russia is the world’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and lags behind many Western countries in greening its industry.

However, its emissions plunged in the Nineties as its economy collapsed and it now sits on a treasure trove of unused carbon emission permits that could be sold to other countries.

These are due to expire in 2012 with the Kyoto Treaty. The Kremlin wants these to be rolled forward and last week signalled they would not sign a new deal without this, threatening the whole Copenhagen summit.

The crisis caused by the Climategate email row has resulted in the UK’s Met Office being forced to re-examine 160 years’ of climate data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made warming had been undermined by the leaks.

A new three-year analysis of the data will mean the Met Office – which works closely with Prof Jones’s unit – will not be able to declare with complete confidence the extent of global warming trends until the end of 2012.

The Norwich-based university has called in Sir Muir Russell, a former senior civil servant, to investigate the row, which is also the subject of a separate probe by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Last night, news of the Kremlin connection coincided with Norfolk Police confirming to The Mail on Sunday that it was now ‘investigating criminal offences’ in relation to the data breach.

Norfolk police sources said they were working with ‘other agencies’ on the inquiry. But they were unable to say if these included the British security services MI5 and MI6.

This newspaper has established, however, that Scotland Yard computer experts from its Central e-Crime unit are helping Norfolk officers track down the hacker responsible for the leaks.

A Norfolk Police spokeswoman said last night: ‘Norfolk Constabulary can confirm that it is investigating criminal offences in relation to a data breach at the University of East Anglia (UEA).’

The Mail on Sunday tracked down Professor Ross McKitrick, a world-renowned expert on the economic effects of climate change, who said Prof Jones had tried to stop his findings being published in an influential UN report.

Prof McKitrick concluded that Jones and his colleagues at the CRU had overstated the effects of greenhouse gas emissions on global temperatures by failing to take account of external factors linked to population growth and urbanisation.

The attempt to silence McKitrick was revealed in an email from Jones to a US colleague in 2004, when the UN was preparing for a major report by the IPCC.

After describing McKitrick’s findings as ‘garbage’ and dismissing another researcher’s work as inaccurate, Prof Jones wrote: ‘I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is! Cheers, Phil.’

‘Kevin’ is understood to refer to Dr Kevin Trenberth, a Jones ally and climate analyst at the National Centre for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

A spokesman for the University of East Anglia said last night: ‘A police inquiry is under way.’

Explore more:

@NoAtheism.

people engaged in a debate don't shout like ill-mannered untethered children. Posting links does not constitute proof because in the current discourse on climate warming either side has a point to put across. For every link "of proof you put out there about the emails, I could more than equalize with contrary info so do not play righteous. On the Russian connection, you can be skeptical as you should when neutral issues such as climate are taken captive by ideological interest. That is the true mark of intelligence.

I asked you a simple question how the incremental emissions of carbon into the atmosphere in the wake of expanding global industrialization factors in the anti-global warming theory. You chose to be mute on that one.

So listen, stop being gratuitous as playing petulance and read some more: here is a much more recent link on the story and there are many more.

Were Russian security services behind the leak of 'Climategate' emails?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1233562/Emails-rocked-climate-change-campaign-leaked-Siberian-closed-city-university-built-KGB.html#
By Will Stewart and Martin Delgado
Last updated at 1:29 PM on 06th December 2009



Suspicions were growing last night that Russian security services were behind the leaking of the notorious British ‘Climategate’ emails which threaten to undermine tomorrow’s Copenhagen global warming summit.

An investigation by The Mail on Sunday has discovered that the explosive hacked emails from the University of East Anglia were leaked via a small web server in the formerly closed city of Tomsk in Siberia.

The leaks scandal has left the scientific community in disarray after claims that key climate change data was manipulated in the run-up to the climate change summit of world leaders.
Sergei Kirpotin

Sergei Kirpotin of Tomsk University warned that the melting of the peat bogs in Siberia is 'an ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climactic warming'

The row erupted when hundreds of messages between scientists at the university’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and their colleagues around the world were placed on the internet along with other documents.

The CRU is internationally recognised as one of the most important sources of information on the rise in global temperatures.

Its data is relied on by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN body which co-ordinates the world response to climate change.



But now the CRU’s findings are under suspicion.

The leaked emails appear to show that CRU director Professor Phil Jones and colleagues attempted to manipulate the figures and hide their raw data from researchers with opposing views.

Prof Jones has stepped aside from his post while claims are investigated that he wanted certain papers excluded from the United Nations’ next major assessment of climate science.

Russia – one of the world’s largest producers and users of oil and gas – has a vested interest in opposing sweeping new agreements to cut emissions, which will be discussed by world leaders in Copenhagen tomorrow.

Russia believes current rules are stacked against it, and has threatened to pull the plug on Copenhagen without concessions to Kremlin concerns.

The Mail on Sunday understands that the hundreds of hacked emails were released to the world via a tiny internet server in a red brick building in a snow-clad street in Tomsk.
v

The Tomsk office from which emails may have been leaked

The original internet link was quickly removed after the information spread from it like wildfire on to international websites.

A message written in English accompanied the leaked package of emails. It read: ‘We feel that climate science is too important to be kept under wraps.

'We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code and documents. Hopefully it will give some insight into the science and the people behind it.’

Climate-change sceptics in the West seized on the emails as evidence that the books were being cooked by the global-warming lobby.

Stories highlighting the ‘scandal’ began to appear from November 21, three or four days after the information was first released on to the server. Some of the leaked emails date back to March, 1996.

Tomcity – the server – and Tomline, its parent company, were unavailable for comment yesterday.

The firm offers an internet security business to prevent hacking and bugs and the ‘compromising of confidential information’.

Other divisions of the firm are involved in laying the cable which provides high-speed internet access to companies in the Siberian city.

The server is believed to be used mainly by Tomsk State University, one of the leading academic institutions in Russia, and other scientific institutes.

Computer hackers in Tomsk have been used in the past by the Russian secret service (FSB) to shut websites which promote views disliked by Moscow.

Such arrangements provide the Russian government with plausible deniability while using so-called ‘hacker patriots’ to shut down websites.

In 2002, Tomsk students were said to have launched a ‘denial of service’ attack at the Kavkaz-Tsentr portal, a site whose reports about Chechnya angered Russian officials.

The FSB office in Tomsk put out a special Press release saying that what the students had done was a legitimate ‘expression of their position as citizens, one worthy of respect’.

A Russian hacking specialist said last night: ‘There is no hard evidence that the hacking was done from Tomsk, though it might have been.

'There has been speculation the hackers were Russian. It appears to have been a sophisticated and well-run operation, that had a political motive given the timing in relation to Copenhagen.’

And gazeta.ru news website, having received information about the Tomsk server connection, said: ‘Presumably it was Russian hackers who broke into the servers of the university.’

The university said that there was strict security on its server, heightening the theory that an extremely sophisticated hacking operation was carried out to obtain it.

East Anglia University has gone out of its way to promote itself to students from the former Soviet Union. Its website says that 33 Russian students currently study there.

It is not known if they have fallen under suspicion as part of the police investigation.
Tomsk – 2,190 miles east of Moscow – was closed to foreigners during the Soviet era.

Its population of 630,000 includes the secret satellite city of Seversk, formerly known as Tomsk-7 and seven miles to the north, which houses strategic uranium and plutonium plants and remains shut to Westerners.

It was built in the Fifties by 20,000 prisoners from nearby Siberian labour camps.

Today, the city, and especially Seversk, remains closely monitored by the FSB, the successor security service to the Soviet-era KGB.

The city’s academic quarter – some of which uses the server that revealed the climate-change scandal – includes a leading world expert on the subject, Professor Sergei Kirpotin, a botanist of Tomsk University.

He was unavailable yesterday and has not commented on the email controversy.

Previously, in research with academic Judith Marquand from Oxford University, he warned of the risk of the release of billions of tons of methane gas because of the melting of the Siberian peat bogs, seen as being due to global warming.

Kirpotin described the situation as ‘an ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climatic warming’.

Russia is the world’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and lags behind many Western countries in greening its industry.

However, its emissions plunged in the Nineties as its economy collapsed and it now sits on a treasure trove of unused carbon emission permits that could be sold to other countries.

These are due to expire in 2012 with the Kyoto Treaty. The Kremlin wants these to be rolled forward and last week signalled they would not sign a new deal without this, threatening the whole Copenhagen summit.

The crisis caused by the Climategate email row has resulted in the UK’s Met Office being forced to re-examine 160 years’ of climate data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made warming had been undermined by the leaks.

A new three-year analysis of the data will mean the Met Office – which works closely with Prof Jones’s unit – will not be able to declare with complete confidence the extent of global warming trends until the end of 2012.

The Norwich-based university has called in Sir Muir Russell, a former senior civil servant, to investigate the row, which is also the subject of a separate probe by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Last night, news of the Kremlin connection coincided with Norfolk Police confirming to The Mail on Sunday that it was now ‘investigating criminal offences’ in relation to the data breach.

Norfolk police sources said they were working with ‘other agencies’ on the inquiry. But they were unable to say if these included the British security services MI5 and MI6.

This newspaper has established, however, that Scotland Yard computer experts from its Central e-Crime unit are helping Norfolk officers track down the hacker responsible for the leaks.

A Norfolk Police spokeswoman said last night: ‘Norfolk Constabulary can confirm that it is investigating criminal offences in relation to a data breach at the University of East Anglia (UEA).’

The Mail on Sunday tracked down Professor Ross McKitrick, a world-renowned expert on the economic effects of climate change, who said Prof Jones had tried to stop his findings being published in an influential UN report.

Prof McKitrick concluded that Jones and his colleagues at the CRU had overstated the effects of greenhouse gas emissions on global temperatures by failing to take account of external factors linked to population growth and urbanisation.

The attempt to silence McKitrick was revealed in an email from Jones to a US colleague in 2004, when the UN was preparing for a major report by the IPCC.

After describing McKitrick’s findings as ‘garbage’ and dismissing another researcher’s work as inaccurate, Prof Jones wrote: ‘I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is! Cheers, Phil.’

‘Kevin’ is understood to refer to Dr Kevin Trenberth, a Jones ally and climate analyst at the National Centre for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

A spokesman for the University of East Anglia said last night: ‘A police inquiry is under way.’

Explore more:

@NoAtheism.

people engaged in a debate don't shout like ill-mannered untethered children. Posting links does not constitute proof because in the current discourse on climate warming either side has a point to put across. For every link "of proof you put out there about the emails, I could more than equalize with contrary info so do not play righteous. On the Russian connection, you can be skeptical as you should when neutral issues such as climate are taken captive by ideological interest. That is the true mark of intelligence.

I asked you a simple question how the incremental emissions of carbon into the atmosphere in the wake of expanding global industrialization factors in the anti-global warming theory. You chose to be mute on that one.

So listen, stop being gratuitous as playing petulance and read some more: here is a much more recent link on the story and there are many more.

Were Russian security services behind the leak of 'Climategate' emails?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1233562/Emails-rocked-climate-change-campaign-leaked-Siberian-closed-city-university-built-KGB.html#
By Will Stewart and Martin Delgado
Last updated at 1:29 PM on 06th December 2009



Suspicions were growing last night that Russian security services were behind the leaking of the notorious British ‘Climategate’ emails which threaten to undermine tomorrow’s Copenhagen global warming summit.

An investigation by The Mail on Sunday has discovered that the explosive hacked emails from the University of East Anglia were leaked via a small web server in the formerly closed city of Tomsk in Siberia.

The leaks scandal has left the scientific community in disarray after claims that key climate change data was manipulated in the run-up to the climate change summit of world leaders.
Sergei Kirpotin

Sergei Kirpotin of Tomsk University warned that the melting of the peat bogs in Siberia is 'an ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climactic warming'

The row erupted when hundreds of messages between scientists at the university’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and their colleagues around the world were placed on the internet along with other documents.

The CRU is internationally recognised as one of the most important sources of information on the rise in global temperatures.

Its data is relied on by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN body which co-ordinates the world response to climate change.



But now the CRU’s findings are under suspicion.

The leaked emails appear to show that CRU director Professor Phil Jones and colleagues attempted to manipulate the figures and hide their raw data from researchers with opposing views.

Prof Jones has stepped aside from his post while claims are investigated that he wanted certain papers excluded from the United Nations’ next major assessment of climate science.

Russia – one of the world’s largest producers and users of oil and gas – has a vested interest in opposing sweeping new agreements to cut emissions, which will be discussed by world leaders in Copenhagen tomorrow.

Russia believes current rules are stacked against it, and has threatened to pull the plug on Copenhagen without concessions to Kremlin concerns.

The Mail on Sunday understands that the hundreds of hacked emails were released to the world via a tiny internet server in a red brick building in a snow-clad street in Tomsk.
v

The Tomsk office from which emails may have been leaked

The original internet link was quickly removed after the information spread from it like wildfire on to international websites.

A message written in English accompanied the leaked package of emails. It read: ‘We feel that climate science is too important to be kept under wraps.

'We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code and documents. Hopefully it will give some insight into the science and the people behind it.’

Climate-change sceptics in the West seized on the emails as evidence that the books were being cooked by the global-warming lobby.

Stories highlighting the ‘scandal’ began to appear from November 21, three or four days after the information was first released on to the server. Some of the leaked emails date back to March, 1996.

Tomcity – the server – and Tomline, its parent company, were unavailable for comment yesterday.

The firm offers an internet security business to prevent hacking and bugs and the ‘compromising of confidential information’.

Other divisions of the firm are involved in laying the cable which provides high-speed internet access to companies in the Siberian city.

The server is believed to be used mainly by Tomsk State University, one of the leading academic institutions in Russia, and other scientific institutes.

Computer hackers in Tomsk have been used in the past by the Russian secret service (FSB) to shut websites which promote views disliked by Moscow.

Such arrangements provide the Russian government with plausible deniability while using so-called ‘hacker patriots’ to shut down websites.

In 2002, Tomsk students were said to have launched a ‘denial of service’ attack at the Kavkaz-Tsentr portal, a site whose reports about Chechnya angered Russian officials.

The FSB office in Tomsk put out a special Press release saying that what the students had done was a legitimate ‘expression of their position as citizens, one worthy of respect’.

A Russian hacking specialist said last night: ‘There is no hard evidence that the hacking was done from Tomsk, though it might have been.

'There has been speculation the hackers were Russian. It appears to have been a sophisticated and well-run operation, that had a political motive given the timing in relation to Copenhagen.’

And gazeta.ru news website, having received information about the Tomsk server connection, said: ‘Presumably it was Russian hackers who broke into the servers of the university.’

The university said that there was strict security on its server, heightening the theory that an extremely sophisticated hacking operation was carried out to obtain it.

East Anglia University has gone out of its way to promote itself to students from the former Soviet Union. Its website says that 33 Russian students currently study there.

It is not known if they have fallen under suspicion as part of the police investigation.
Tomsk – 2,190 miles east of Moscow – was closed to foreigners during the Soviet era.

Its population of 630,000 includes the secret satellite city of Seversk, formerly known as Tomsk-7 and seven miles to the north, which houses strategic uranium and plutonium plants and remains shut to Westerners.

It was built in the Fifties by 20,000 prisoners from nearby Siberian labour camps.

Today, the city, and especially Seversk, remains closely monitored by the FSB, the successor security service to the Soviet-era KGB.

The city’s academic quarter – some of which uses the server that revealed the climate-change scandal – includes a leading world expert on the subject, Professor Sergei Kirpotin, a botanist of Tomsk University.

He was unavailable yesterday and has not commented on the email controversy.

Previously, in research with academic Judith Marquand from Oxford University, he warned of the risk of the release of billions of tons of methane gas because of the melting of the Siberian peat bogs, seen as being due to global warming.

Kirpotin described the situation as ‘an ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climatic warming’.

Russia is the world’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and lags behind many Western countries in greening its industry.

However, its emissions plunged in the Nineties as its economy collapsed and it now sits on a treasure trove of unused carbon emission permits that could be sold to other countries.

These are due to expire in 2012 with the Kyoto Treaty. The Kremlin wants these to be rolled forward and last week signalled they would not sign a new deal without this, threatening the whole Copenhagen summit.

The crisis caused by the Climategate email row has resulted in the UK’s Met Office being forced to re-examine 160 years’ of climate data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made warming had been undermined by the leaks.

A new three-year analysis of the data will mean the Met Office – which works closely with Prof Jones’s unit – will not be able to declare with complete confidence the extent of global warming trends until the end of 2012.

The Norwich-based university has called in Sir Muir Russell, a former senior civil servant, to investigate the row, which is also the subject of a separate probe by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Last night, news of the Kremlin connection coincided with Norfolk Police confirming to The Mail on Sunday that it was now ‘investigating criminal offences’ in relation to the data breach.

Norfolk police sources said they were working with ‘other agencies’ on the inquiry. But they were unable to say if these included the British security services MI5 and MI6.

This newspaper has established, however, that Scotland Yard computer experts from its Central e-Crime unit are helping Norfolk officers track down the hacker responsible for the leaks.

A Norfolk Police spokeswoman said last night: ‘Norfolk Constabulary can confirm that it is investigating criminal offences in relation to a data breach at the University of East Anglia (UEA).’

The Mail on Sunday tracked down Professor Ross McKitrick, a world-renowned expert on the economic effects of climate change, who said Prof Jones had tried to stop his findings being published in an influential UN report.

Prof McKitrick concluded that Jones and his colleagues at the CRU had overstated the effects of greenhouse gas emissions on global temperatures by failing to take account of external factors linked to population growth and urbanisation.

The attempt to silence McKitrick was revealed in an email from Jones to a US colleague in 2004, when the UN was preparing for a major report by the IPCC.

After describing McKitrick’s findings as ‘garbage’ and dismissing another researcher’s work as inaccurate, Prof Jones wrote: ‘I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is! Cheers, Phil.’

‘Kevin’ is understood to refer to Dr Kevin Trenberth, a Jones ally and climate analyst at the National Centre for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

A spokesman for the University of East Anglia said last night: ‘A police inquiry is under way.’

Explore more:

@NoAtheism.

people engaged in a debate don't shout like ill-mannered untethered children. Posting links does not constitute proof because in the current discourse on climate warming either side has a point to put across. For every link "of proof you put out there about the emails, I could more than equalize with contrary info so do not play righteous. On the Russian connection, you can be skeptical as you should when neutral issues such as climate are taken captive by ideological interest. That is the true mark of intelligence.

I asked you a simple question how the incremental emissions of carbon into the atmosphere in the wake of expanding global industrialization factors in the anti-global warming theory. You chose to be mute on that one.

So listen, stop being gratuitous as playing petulance and read some more: here is a much more recent link on the story and there are many more.

Were Russian security services behind the leak of 'Climategate' emails?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1233562/Emails-rocked-climate-change-campaign-leaked-Siberian-closed-city-university-built-KGB.html#
By Will Stewart and Martin Delgado
Last updated at 1:29 PM on 06th December 2009



Suspicions were growing last night that Russian security services were behind the leaking of the notorious British ‘Climategate’ emails which threaten to undermine tomorrow’s Copenhagen global warming summit.

An investigation by The Mail on Sunday has discovered that the explosive hacked emails from the University of East Anglia were leaked via a small web server in the formerly closed city of Tomsk in Siberia.

The leaks scandal has left the scientific community in disarray after claims that key climate change data was manipulated in the run-up to the climate change summit of world leaders.
Sergei Kirpotin

Sergei Kirpotin of Tomsk University warned that the melting of the peat bogs in Siberia is 'an ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climactic warming'

The row erupted when hundreds of messages between scientists at the university’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and their colleagues around the world were placed on the internet along with other documents.

The CRU is internationally recognised as one of the most important sources of information on the rise in global temperatures.

Its data is relied on by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN body which co-ordinates the world response to climate change.



But now the CRU’s findings are under suspicion.

The leaked emails appear to show that CRU director Professor Phil Jones and colleagues attempted to manipulate the figures and hide their raw data from researchers with opposing views.

Prof Jones has stepped aside from his post while claims are investigated that he wanted certain papers excluded from the United Nations’ next major assessment of climate science.

Russia – one of the world’s largest producers and users of oil and gas – has a vested interest in opposing sweeping new agreements to cut emissions, which will be discussed by world leaders in Copenhagen tomorrow.

Russia believes current rules are stacked against it, and has threatened to pull the plug on Copenhagen without concessions to Kremlin concerns.

The Mail on Sunday understands that the hundreds of hacked emails were released to the world via a tiny internet server in a red brick building in a snow-clad street in Tomsk.
v

The Tomsk office from which emails may have been leaked

The original internet link was quickly removed after the information spread from it like wildfire on to international websites.

A message written in English accompanied the leaked package of emails. It read: ‘We feel that climate science is too important to be kept under wraps.

'We hereby release a random selection of correspondence, code and documents. Hopefully it will give some insight into the science and the people behind it.’

Climate-change sceptics in the West seized on the emails as evidence that the books were being cooked by the global-warming lobby.

Stories highlighting the ‘scandal’ began to appear from November 21, three or four days after the information was first released on to the server. Some of the leaked emails date back to March, 1996.

Tomcity – the server – and Tomline, its parent company, were unavailable for comment yesterday.

The firm offers an internet security business to prevent hacking and bugs and the ‘compromising of confidential information’.

Other divisions of the firm are involved in laying the cable which provides high-speed internet access to companies in the Siberian city.

The server is believed to be used mainly by Tomsk State University, one of the leading academic institutions in Russia, and other scientific institutes.

Computer hackers in Tomsk have been used in the past by the Russian secret service (FSB) to shut websites which promote views disliked by Moscow.

Such arrangements provide the Russian government with plausible deniability while using so-called ‘hacker patriots’ to shut down websites.

In 2002, Tomsk students were said to have launched a ‘denial of service’ attack at the Kavkaz-Tsentr portal, a site whose reports about Chechnya angered Russian officials.

The FSB office in Tomsk put out a special Press release saying that what the students had done was a legitimate ‘expression of their position as citizens, one worthy of respect’.

A Russian hacking specialist said last night: ‘There is no hard evidence that the hacking was done from Tomsk, though it might have been.

'There has been speculation the hackers were Russian. It appears to have been a sophisticated and well-run operation, that had a political motive given the timing in relation to Copenhagen.’

And gazeta.ru news website, having received information about the Tomsk server connection, said: ‘Presumably it was Russian hackers who broke into the servers of the university.’

The university said that there was strict security on its server, heightening the theory that an extremely sophisticated hacking operation was carried out to obtain it.

East Anglia University has gone out of its way to promote itself to students from the former Soviet Union. Its website says that 33 Russian students currently study there.

It is not known if they have fallen under suspicion as part of the police investigation.
Tomsk – 2,190 miles east of Moscow – was closed to foreigners during the Soviet era.

Its population of 630,000 includes the secret satellite city of Seversk, formerly known as Tomsk-7 and seven miles to the north, which houses strategic uranium and plutonium plants and remains shut to Westerners.

It was built in the Fifties by 20,000 prisoners from nearby Siberian labour camps.

Today, the city, and especially Seversk, remains closely monitored by the FSB, the successor security service to the Soviet-era KGB.

The city’s academic quarter – some of which uses the server that revealed the climate-change scandal – includes a leading world expert on the subject, Professor Sergei Kirpotin, a botanist of Tomsk University.

He was unavailable yesterday and has not commented on the email controversy.

Previously, in research with academic Judith Marquand from Oxford University, he warned of the risk of the release of billions of tons of methane gas because of the melting of the Siberian peat bogs, seen as being due to global warming.

Kirpotin described the situation as ‘an ecological landslide that is probably irreversible and is undoubtedly connected to climatic warming’.

Russia is the world’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and lags behind many Western countries in greening its industry.

However, its emissions plunged in the Nineties as its economy collapsed and it now sits on a treasure trove of unused carbon emission permits that could be sold to other countries.

These are due to expire in 2012 with the Kyoto Treaty. The Kremlin wants these to be rolled forward and last week signalled they would not sign a new deal without this, threatening the whole Copenhagen summit.

The crisis caused by the Climategate email row has resulted in the UK’s Met Office being forced to re-examine 160 years’ of climate data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made warming had been undermined by the leaks.

A new three-year analysis of the data will mean the Met Office – which works closely with Prof Jones’s unit – will not be able to declare with complete confidence the extent of global warming trends until the end of 2012.

The Norwich-based university has called in Sir Muir Russell, a former senior civil servant, to investigate the row, which is also the subject of a separate probe by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Last night, news of the Kremlin connection coincided with Norfolk Police confirming to The Mail on Sunday that it was now ‘investigating criminal offences’ in relation to the data breach.

Norfolk police sources said they were working with ‘other agencies’ on the inquiry. But they were unable to say if these included the British security services MI5 and MI6.

This newspaper has established, however, that Scotland Yard computer experts from its Central e-Crime unit are helping Norfolk officers track down the hacker responsible for the leaks.

A Norfolk Police spokeswoman said last night: ‘Norfolk Constabulary can confirm that it is investigating criminal offences in relation to a data breach at the University of East Anglia (UEA).’

The Mail on Sunday tracked down Professor Ross McKitrick, a world-renowned expert on the economic effects of climate change, who said Prof Jones had tried to stop his findings being published in an influential UN report.

Prof McKitrick concluded that Jones and his colleagues at the CRU had overstated the effects of greenhouse gas emissions on global temperatures by failing to take account of external factors linked to population growth and urbanisation.

The attempt to silence McKitrick was revealed in an email from Jones to a US colleague in 2004, when the UN was preparing for a major report by the IPCC.

After describing McKitrick’s findings as ‘garbage’ and dismissing another researcher’s work as inaccurate, Prof Jones wrote: ‘I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is! Cheers, Phil.’

‘Kevin’ is understood to refer to Dr Kevin Trenberth, a Jones ally and climate analyst at the National Centre for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado.

A spokesman for the University of East Anglia said last night: ‘A police inquiry is under way.’

Explore more:

No2Atheism:

So i beg you in the name of the Creator of Heaven and Earth . . . do not come at me with the "Russian" thingy . . .

- Its your choice and decision to believe in Global Warming . . . however what i would please like you to stop is to please not even attempt to discredit something that was confirmed to be true (yes I am talking about the hacked emails which you tried to discredit with your statement).


This would most probably be my last response to your post on this thread . . . cus I am really sick and tired of seeing people dogmatically following the Global Warming nonsense . . .even though raw scientific data contradicts goes against it.

HAVE A GOOD DAY.

Halllo

Do enlighten me on the data on carbon emissions into the atmosphere in 1100 BC compared to AD 2006. We could begin at that point.

Here are a few sites where you can read what others think of Globel Warming.  My opinion is that it's a scam by the rich to get even richer. 


http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2008/03/31/warming-island-another-global-warming-myth-exposed/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/

http://www.blog.speculist.com/archives/001668.html

http://www.free-eco.org/articleDisplay.php?id=294

http://www.globalwarminghysteria.com/ten-myths-of-global-warming/

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/bellamy-one-must-ignore-200-years-of-observations-to-believe-in-agw-pjm-exclusive/

http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=128&Itemid=1

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090910_summerstats.html

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2009/01/blowing_holes_i.html

http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-440049/Greenhouse-effect-myth-say-scientists.html

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm

http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=8172

http://www.dailytech.com/Researcher+Basic+Greenhouse+Equations+Totally+Wrong/article10973.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html

http://www.climatedepot.com/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/GB25Aa02.html

Billygoat:

Here are a few sites where you can read what others think of Globel Warming.  My opinion is that it's a scam by the rich to get even richer. 


http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2008/03/31/warming-island-another-global-warming-myth-exposed/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/

http://www.blog.speculist.com/archives/001668.html

http://www.free-eco.org/articleDisplay.php?id=294

http://www.globalwarminghysteria.com/ten-myths-of-global-warming/

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/bellamy-one-must-ignore-200-years-of-observations-to-believe-in-agw-pjm-exclusive/

http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=128&Itemid=1

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/20090910_summerstats.html

http://www.moonbattery.com/archives/2009/01/blowing_holes_i.html

http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-440049/Greenhouse-effect-myth-say-scientists.html

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm

http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=8172

http://www.dailytech.com/Researcher+Basic+Greenhouse+Equations+Totally+Wrong/article10973.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/6679082/Climate-change-this-is-the-worst-scientific-scandal-of-our-generation.html

http://www.climatedepot.com/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/GB25Aa02.html

I have visited those sites and glanced and none even remotely answers the specific question I asked you about data on the history or lack thereof of carbon emissions circa the days of Abraham for instance.

Edit:

The information I have referenced earlier is enough to convince even the most fanatical global warming scam advocate. . . nevertheless I just came across this new video showing something similar to the other things i had earlier reference on this thread.

You would notice from the Video that the so called Global Warming is complete nonsense when compared to historical data as shown in the video . . .

LET HE WHO HAS AN EAR HEAR . . . ENOUGH OF ALL THIS EUROCENTRIC NEO-COLONIALISTIC ATTEMPT AT PUTTING EVERYONE INTO ECONOMIC SLAVERY VIA THE SCAM VEHICLE KNOWN AS GLOBAL WARMING.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFbUVBYIPlI&feature=player_embedded

[flash=400,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/DFbUVBYIPlI&feature=player_embedded[/flash]

@ No2Atheism

You are doing a great job exposing the global warming fraud. Keep it coming. Thanks for posting that timeline, next time I get into a debate with a brainwashed 'climate activist', I'll use it.

No2Atheism:

Edit:

The information I have referenced earlier is enough to convince even the most fanatical global warming scam advocate. . . nevertheless I just came across this new video showing something similar to the other things i had earlier reference on this thread.

You would notice from the Video that the so called Global Warming is complete nonsense when compared to historical data as shown in the video . . .

LET HE WHO HAS AN EAR HEAR . . . ENOUGH OF ALL THIS EUROCENTRIC NEO-COLONIALISTIC ATTEMPT AT PUTTING EVERYONE INTO ECONOMIC SLAVERY VIA THE SCAM VEHICLE KNOWN AS GLOBAL WARMING.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFbUVBYIPlI&feature=player_embedded

[flash=400,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/DFbUVBYIPlI&feature=player_embedded[/flash]

Now you are becoming hysterical. You are posting evidence to buttress your choice of which side to support on this account by using info matshalled by the same Euro-centric and Western sources you accuse proponents of global warming of having fallen captive to. Where is the logic. And how African are your sources if the Eurocetric-ness is for you the bane of the opposing views.

I asked a simple question by beginning with the issue of carbon emissions. rather than go on an overkill tirade you would first respond to that then we move on to the next item forming the building blocks of the global warming reality or lack thereof.

AP IMPACT: Science not faked, but not pretty
BY SETH BORENSTEIN, RAPHAEL SATTER and MALCOLM RITTER, Associated Press Writers Seth Borenstein, Raphael Satter And Malcolm Ritter, Associated Press Writers Sat Dec 12, 5:58 pm ET

LONDON – E-mails stolen from climate scientists show they stonewalled skeptics and discussed hiding data — but the messages don't support claims that the science of global warming was faked, according to an exhaustive review by The Associated Press.

The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

The scientists were keenly aware of how their work would be viewed and used, and, just like politicians, went to great pains to shape their message. Sometimes, they sounded more like schoolyard taunts than scientific tenets.

The scientists were so convinced by their own science and so driven by a cause "that unless you're with them, you're against them," said Mark Frankel, director of scientific freedom, responsibility and law at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He also reviewed the communications.

Frankel saw "no evidence of falsification or fabrication of data, although concerns could be raised about some instances of very 'generous interpretations.'"

Some e-mails expressed doubts about the quality of individual temperature records or why models and data didn't quite match. Part of this is the normal give-and-take of research, but skeptics challenged how reliable certain data was.

The e-mails were stolen from the computer network server of the climate research unit at the University of East Anglia in southeast England, an influential source of climate science, and were posted online last month. The university shut down the server and contacted the police.

The AP studied all the e-mails for context, with five reporters reading and rereading them — about 1 million words in total.

One of the most disturbing elements suggests an effort to avoid sharing scientific data with critics skeptical of global warming. It is not clear if any data was destroyed; two U.S. researchers denied it.

The e-mails show that several mainstream scientists repeatedly suggested keeping their research materials away from opponents who sought it under American and British public records law. It raises a science ethics question because free access to data is important so others can repeat experiments as part of the scientific method. The University of East Anglia is investigating the blocking of information requests.

"I believe none of us should submit to these 'requests,'" declared the university's Keith Briffa. The center's chief, Phil Jones, wrote: "Data is covered by all the agreements we sign with people, so I will be hiding behind them."

When one skeptic kept filing FOI requests, Jones, who didn't return AP requests for comment, told another scientist, Michael Mann: "You can delete this attachment if you want. Keep this quiet also, but this is the person who is putting FOI requests for all e-mails Keith (Briffa) and Tim (Osborn) have written."

Mann, a researcher at Penn State University, told The Associated Press: "I didn't delete any e-mails as Phil asked me to. I don't believe anybody else did."

The e-mails also show how professional attacks turned very personal. When former London financial trader Douglas J. Keenan combed through the data used in a 1990 research paper Jones had co-authored, Keenan claimed to have found evidence of fakery by Jones' co-author. Keenan threatened to have the FBI arrest University at Albany scientist Wei-Chyung Wang for fraud. (A university investigation later cleared him of any wrongdoing.)

"I do now wish I'd never sent them the data after their FOIA request!" Jones wrote in June 2007.

In another case after initially balking on releasing data to a skeptic because it was already public, Lawrence Livermore National Lab scientist Ben Santer wrote that he then opted to release everything the skeptic wanted — and more. Santer said in a telephone interview that he and others are inundated by frivolous requests from skeptics that are designed to "tie-up government-funded scientists."

The e-mails also showed a stunning disdain for global warming skeptics.

One scientist practically celebrates the news of the death of one critic, saying, "In an odd way this is cheering news!" Another bemoans that the only way to deal with skeptics is "continuing to publish quality work in quality journals (or calling in a Mafia hit.)" And a third scientist said the next time he sees a certain skeptic at a scientific meeting, "I'll be tempted to beat the crap out of him. Very tempted."

And they compared contrarians to communist-baiting Sen. Joseph McCarthy and Somali pirates. They also called them out-and-out frauds.

Santer, who received death threats after his work on climate change in 1996, said Thursday: "I'm not surprised that things are said in the heat of the moment between professional colleagues. These things are taken out of context."

When the journal, Climate Research, published a skeptical study, Penn State scientist Mann discussed retribution this way: "Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal."

That skeptical study turned out to be partly funded by the American Petroleum Institute.

The most provocative e-mails are usually about one aspect of climate science: research from a decade ago that studied how warm or cold it was centuries ago through analysis of tree rings, ice cores and glacial melt. And most of those e-mails, which stretch from 1996 to last month, are from about a handful of scientists in dozens of e-mails.

Still, such research has been a key element in measuring climate change over long periods.

As part of the AP review, summaries of the e-mails that raised issues from the potential manipulation of data to intensely personal attacks were sent to seven experts in research ethics, climate science and science policy.

"This is normal science politics, but on the extreme end, though still within bounds," said Dan Sarewitz, a science policy professor at Arizona State University. "We talk about science as this pure ideal and the scientific method as if it is something out of a cookbook, but research is a social and human activity full of all the failings of society and humans, and this reality gets totally magnified by the high political stakes here."

In the past three weeks since the e-mails were posted, longtime opponents of mainstream climate science have repeatedly quoted excerpts of about a dozen e-mails. Republican congressmen and former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin have called for either independent investigations, a delay in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulation of greenhouse gases or outright boycotts of the Copenhagen international climate talks. They cited a "culture of corruption" that the e-mails appeared to show.

That is not what the AP found. There were signs of trying to present the data as convincingly as possible.

One e-mail that skeptics have been citing often since the messages were posted online is from Jones. He says: "I've just completed Mike's (Mann) trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (from 1981 onward) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."

Jones was referring to tree ring data that indicated temperatures after the 1950s weren't as warm as scientists had determined.

The "trick" that Jones said he was borrowing from Mann was to add the real temperatures, not what the tree rings showed. And the decline he talked of hiding was not in real temperatures, but in the tree ring data which was misleading, Mann explained.

Sometimes the data didn't line up as perfectly as scientists wanted.

David Rind told colleagues about inconsistent figures in the work for a giant international report: "As this continuing exchange has clarified, what's in Chapter 6 is inconsistent with what is in Chapter 2 (and Chapter 9 is caught in the middle!). Worse yet, we've managed to make global warming go away! (Maybe it really is that easy, ."

But in the end, global warming didn't go away, according to the vast body of research over the years.

None of the e-mails flagged by the AP and sent to three climate scientists viewed as moderates in the field changed their view that global warming is man-made and a threat. Nor did it alter their support of the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which some of the scientists helped write.

"My overall interpretation of the scientific basis for (man-made) global warming is unaltered by the contents of these e-mails," said Gabriel Vecchi, a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientist.

Gerald North, a climate scientist at Texas A&M University, headed a National Academy of Sciences study that looked at — and upheld as valid — Mann's earlier studies that found the 1990s were the hottest years in centuries.

"In my opinion the meaning is much more innocent than might be perceived by others taken out of context. Much of this is overblown," North said.

Mann contends he always has been upfront about uncertainties, pointing to the title of his 1999 study: "Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties and Limitations."

Several scientists found themselves tailoring their figures or retooling their arguments to answer online arguments — even as they claimed not to care what was being posted to the Internet

"I don't read the blogs that regularly," Jonathan Overpeck of the University of Arizona wrote in 2005. "But I guess the skeptics are making hay of their (sic) being a global warm (sic) event around 1450AD."

One person singled out for criticism in the e-mails is Steve McIntyre, who maintains Climate Audit. The blog focuses on statistical issues with scientists' attempts to recreate the climate in ancient times.

"We find that the authors are overreaching in the conclusions that they're trying to draw from the data that they have," McIntyre said in a telephone interview.

McIntyre, 62, of Toronto, was trained in math and economics and says he is "substantially retired" from the mineral exploration industry, which produces greenhouse gases.

Some e-mails said McIntyre's attempts to get original data from scientists are frivolous and meant more for harassment than doing good science. There are allegations that he would distort and misuse data given to him.

McIntyre disagreed with how he is portrayed. "Everything that I've done in this, I've done in good faith," he said.

He also said he has avoided editorializing on the leaked e-mails. "Anything I say," he said, "is liable to be piling on."

The skeptics started the name-calling said Mann, who called McIntyre a "bozo," a "fraud" and a "slowpoke" in various e-mails.

"We're human," Mann said. "We've been under attack unfairly by these people who have been attempting to dismiss us as frauds as liars."

The AP is mentioned several times in the e-mails, usually in reference to a published story. One scientist says his remarks were reported with "a bit of journalistic license" and "I would have rephrased or re-expressed some of what was written if I had seen it before it was released." The archive also includes a request from an AP reporter, one of the writers of this story, for reaction to a study, a standard step for journalists seeking quotes for their stories.

___

Associated Press writers Jeff Donn in Boston, Justin Pritchard in Los Angeles contributed to this report. Troy Thibodeaux in Washington provided technical assistance. Satter reported from London, Borenstein from Washington and Ritter from New York.