Climategate scientists above the law.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
THAT LITTLE PIECE OF sh*t NEEDS TO GO TO FEDERAL PRISON WHERE HE WILL GET RAPED AND BRUTALLY BEATEN LIKE A BITCH
withholding data from people who are making it their goal to undermine and destroy your lifes work. Certainly a crime that deserves the most brutal of punishments......
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
withholding data
Illegally withholding data.
Christian Graus wrote:
from people who are making it their goal to undermine and destroy your lifes work
And if your data and processing are valid, how can they undermine and destroy your life's work? And if your life's work is based on a misconception? Is it not best undermined and destroyed? Anyway, my life's work has been destroyed over time. Dear dead systems, with such flair, too. What's become of all the code, Used to hang and cause disruption? I feel chilly and grown old. as Browning might have written.
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
-
Que post from some website that never bothered to actually read all the e-mails. The websites that did read it point out that these guys "talked about doing it and were pretty pissed at the people" but eventually the data was released. But oh darn, some scientists constantly bombarded with FOIA requests designed to make them not be able to do their work got mad about being attacked.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
But oh darn, some scientists constantly bombarded with FOIA requests
Has there been irrefutable evidence of the number of FOIA requests with which Mann claimed he was 'besieged'? Do you think we should submit another FOIA request to find out? :)
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
-
I always laugh at that... It's like some script kiddies DoS'ing a web server, then complaining that it's running slowly.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in? Author of Guardians of Xen (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novel)
Ian Shlasko wrote:
It's like some script kiddies DoS'ing a web server, then complaining that it's running slowly.
Only if the requests are irrelevant. Never hear scientists complaining about the time wasted by attending junkets scientific symposia around the world.
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
-
So you're saying that "ignorance is bliss"? "Information is the currency of democracy." -- Thomas Jefferson It's the name of my show for a reason. There are regulations on the government to keep records and lists and files for whatever they do, no matter what. If any information is held, it as, at the very least, dishonest, and it should be researched and investigated. Because there's no telling what that information could be. I think you'd agree with this.
Government does indeed keep recorded data that is available on request. Of course, there are exceptions on what data can be released, the request has to pass certain tests. However, the University of East Anglia is not government but is a public body and is covered by the same FOIA. The public body you make requests to for FOIA data are responsible for processing the request. An individual working for the public body, irrespective of rank, will be the person who is required to furnish that data if that request falls within (the rules) that which is allowed to be released. If the individual refuses to act upon that request, the individual can be disciplined under his terms and conditions of employment but it is the public body who will be negligent in law and that makes it, primarily, a civil offence not a criminal offence. However, the English Freedom of Information Act is rather different from its Scottish equivalent which is again different from that which is relevant in the United States. Included in the English act are references to other important statutes such as the Data Protection Act and such as the Human Rights Act. If you want to read the text of any UK statute, visit www.opsi.gov.uk and use the search facility
-
Que post from some website that never bothered to actually read all the e-mails. The websites that did read it point out that these guys "talked about doing it and were pretty pissed at the people" but eventually the data was released. But oh darn, some scientists constantly bombarded with FOIA requests designed to make them not be able to do their work got mad about being attacked.
Steve McIntyre to Phil Jones: Since I have been unable to replicate your results exactly based on available materials, I would appreciate a copy of the actual data set used in the Jones and coworkers paper of 1998 as well as the computer programs used in these calculations. Phil Jones to Mike Mann: I got this email from McIntyre a few days ago. As far as I’m concerned he has the data — sent ages ago. I’ll tell him this, but that’s all — no computer program. If I can find the program, it is likely to be hundreds of lines of undocumented FORTRAN! ... I recall the program did a lot more that just average the series. I know why he can’t replicate the results early on — it is because there was a mathematical adjustment when there were fewer data sets. Using the published methodology in Jones, et al, McIntyre is unable to replicate the paper's results. If we accept Jones's statement that the data set is that used in the paper, then the published methodology must be at fault. And Jones admits that there was a "mathematical adjustment" in the program (apparently not included in the paper). It is clear that version control and archiving was unknown at CRU, and that the data and programs had moved on in the 7 years since the paper was published. No wonder they were pissed off. No wonder this was leaked.
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
-
Steve McIntyre to Phil Jones: Since I have been unable to replicate your results exactly based on available materials, I would appreciate a copy of the actual data set used in the Jones and coworkers paper of 1998 as well as the computer programs used in these calculations. Phil Jones to Mike Mann: I got this email from McIntyre a few days ago. As far as I’m concerned he has the data — sent ages ago. I’ll tell him this, but that’s all — no computer program. If I can find the program, it is likely to be hundreds of lines of undocumented FORTRAN! ... I recall the program did a lot more that just average the series. I know why he can’t replicate the results early on — it is because there was a mathematical adjustment when there were fewer data sets. Using the published methodology in Jones, et al, McIntyre is unable to replicate the paper's results. If we accept Jones's statement that the data set is that used in the paper, then the published methodology must be at fault. And Jones admits that there was a "mathematical adjustment" in the program (apparently not included in the paper). It is clear that version control and archiving was unknown at CRU, and that the data and programs had moved on in the 7 years since the paper was published. No wonder they were pissed off. No wonder this was leaked.
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
If repeated or vexatious requests are received, then [quote from FOIA part 1, section 14] (1) Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request for information if the request is vexatious. (2) Where a public authority has previously complied with a request for information which was made by any person, it is not obliged to comply with a subsequent identical or substantially similar request from that person unless a reasonable interval has elapsed between compliance with the previous request and the making of the current request. [/quote]
-
If repeated or vexatious requests are received, then [quote from FOIA part 1, section 14] (1) Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request for information if the request is vexatious. (2) Where a public authority has previously complied with a request for information which was made by any person, it is not obliged to comply with a subsequent identical or substantially similar request from that person unless a reasonable interval has elapsed between compliance with the previous request and the making of the current request. [/quote]
I quote from Climate Feedback[^] (the climate change blog of Nature): Posted by: Stephen McIntyre | August 12, 2009 I am unaware of any reason why Jones would have become "inundated" with requests soon after my 2002 request to him **. If so, it was nothing to do with me, as I had no contact with him until a considerable time later. Climate Audit [McIntyre's blog] did not start until nearly 3 years later and my interests at the time were restricted to proxies. ** In the fall of 2002, Jones had emailed a copy of the file of station data cruwlda2.zip to McIntyre.
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
-
why did you lowercase the word shit in your last sentence when everything else is capitalized?
Check out the CodeProject forum Guidelines[^] The original soapbox 1.0 is back![^]
That's a bug I reported a while back. When CP obscures expletives, it makes them lowercase. Maunder is aware of it, but it's not high on his list of priorities to fix.
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246661/New-scandal-Climate-Gate-scientists-accused-hiding-data-global-warming-sceptics.html[^] Scientist at the heart of the 'Climategate' email scandal broke the law when they refused to give raw data to the public, the privacy watchdog has ruled. The Information Commissioner's office said University of East Anglia researchers breached the Freedom of Information Act when handling requests from climate change sceptics. But the scientists will escape prosecution because the offences took place more than six months ago. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246661/New-scandal-Climate-Gate-scientists-accused-hiding-data-global-warming-sceptics.html#ixzz0e1bueXGH THIS MAKES ME SICK!!!:mad::mad: THAT LITTLE PIECE OF SHIT NEEDS TO GO TO FEDERAL PRISON WHERE HE WILL GET RAPED AND BRUTALLY BEATEN LIKE A BITCH
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
GO TO FEDERAL PRISON WHERE HE WILL GET RAPED AND BRUTALLY BEATEN LIKE A BITCH
This seems to be (to me) a curiously American phenonenon...British prisons don't appear to suffer from the same "issues"....anyone think why?
C# has already designed away most of the tedium of C++.
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
It's like some script kiddies DoS'ing a web server, then complaining that it's running slowly.
Only if the requests are irrelevant. Never hear scientists complaining about the time wasted by attending junkets scientific symposia around the world.
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
Bob Emmett wrote:
Only if the requests are irrelevant.
Guy 1: We want your data about X. Scientist1: Here you go. Guy 1: No, I want it about X. Scientist 1: That is it. Guy 1: Where's the rest? This doesn't show you are wrong. Scientist 1: That is the data. Please actually read it and leave. Guy 2: I want data about X. Scientist: I released it. But here you go. Guy 2: This isn't what I want. Scientist 1: You asked for X, you got X. Guy 2: But I wanted Y, Z, and X. That shows X is wrong. Scientist 1: Y and Z have nothing to do with X. Guy 2: Well, I know better. My Dental Hygiene PHD tells me so. Scientist 2: hey, has Guy 1 been asking for X and not believing you. Scientist 1: Yes, he's a complete twat and keeps sending me requests. Scientist 2: Greta, now some Guy 2 is bothering me. Scientist 1: Watch out for him, he's trying to equate Y,Z and X somehow. Scientist 2: Can we just kill these jerks? They are wasting our time. This seems more the case.
-
Bob Emmett wrote:
Only if the requests are irrelevant.
Guy 1: We want your data about X. Scientist1: Here you go. Guy 1: No, I want it about X. Scientist 1: That is it. Guy 1: Where's the rest? This doesn't show you are wrong. Scientist 1: That is the data. Please actually read it and leave. Guy 2: I want data about X. Scientist: I released it. But here you go. Guy 2: This isn't what I want. Scientist 1: You asked for X, you got X. Guy 2: But I wanted Y, Z, and X. That shows X is wrong. Scientist 1: Y and Z have nothing to do with X. Guy 2: Well, I know better. My Dental Hygiene PHD tells me so. Scientist 2: hey, has Guy 1 been asking for X and not believing you. Scientist 1: Yes, he's a complete twat and keeps sending me requests. Scientist 2: Greta, now some Guy 2 is bothering me. Scientist 1: Watch out for him, he's trying to equate Y,Z and X somehow. Scientist 2: Can we just kill these jerks? They are wasting our time. This seems more the case.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
This seems more the case.
However, whatever seems to be the case: Two scientists who could not arrive at Professor Jones's published results with the data set he provided and using his published methodology, requested a copy of the data set he used in his paper, and the source of the programs used to provide the published results. Professor Jones said that the data set he had provided was that used in the paper, and refused to provide the source code. It does not matter that the scientists in question may have been sceptics, all the better, they are more likely to discover any flaws in reasoning. It does not matter that they were not climatologists, they did not need to be for the analyses they were performing. In my opinion, it seems as if version control and documentation of data and programs was virtually non-existent, and it seems that shame might also have been a motive for Professor Jones's refusal. [Edit 2010/02/13: It appears that shame was indeed a motive[^] for the Professor Jones's refusal: Phil Jones, the professor behind the "Climategate" affair, has admitted some of his decades-old weather data was not well enough organised. He said this contributed to his refusal to share raw data with critics - a decision he says he regretted.
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
modified on Saturday, February 13, 2010 11:54 AM