the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

UEA Culture of Corruption

Posted by Jeff Id on February 28, 2010

After reviewing some of the links people have left here, my opinion on this is that Lulu is probably unable to substantiate his accusations.  This Parliament comment should probably be ignored until some substantiation is offered.

—-

It appears the Parliamentary submissions are heating up.  Reader Curious left a link to a postgrad from UEA who makes very strong accusations. I have to note that in the same post, this person appears to recommend bigger pre-corrupted Commuhagen style government whilst complaining about the obvious corruption of the official UEA organization.  It’s saying — ‘Gee this is corrupt followed by lets make more!!!’ I’ll never understand how people get so confused with political wrongthink but that’s the world these days.

Still the point about the culture of UEA appears valid.  When Mick Kelly can discuss openly with Phil Jones the clipping of data points from the end of a  temperature curve — something is culturally VERY wrong.  I try to imagine that back in my college lab days.  Hey Doc, these last points from this airfoil test don’t match my hoped for result. I’m going to clip them.    Can you even imagine?!!  Yet that’s exactly what was written in these emails.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/memo/climatedata/uc0702.htm

Copied in full below – my highlights:

Memorandum submitted by Lalu Hanuman (CRU 07)

1. As a former postgraduate student of the University of East Anglia [UEA], and a British Citizen, I would like to comment on your committee’s planned review of the disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit [CRU] at the UEA. In particular the issue of : “Are the terms of reference and scope of the Independent Review announced on 3 December 2009 by UEA, adequate”.

2. The current furore that the UEA has created by it’s falsifying of climate change information, has undermined global climate change action at the recent Copenhagen talks, with some countries relying on these UEA revelations to question the validity of climate change. The resultant catastrophic effect of the UEA’s actions on future generations, cannot be exaggerated, as it has helped delay united action against looming climate change. A robust and thorough transparent inquiry is called for. Sir Muir Russell’s review is inadequate at least as far as point 3 of his remit goes ie “Review CRU’s compliance or otherwise with the University’s policies and practices regarding requests under the Freedom of Information Act and the Environmental Information Regulations for the release of data”.

3. From my experience as a former postgraduate student of the UEA, I have documentary evidence that the UEA as an institution and it’s agents have often indulged in falsifications, distortions, and misrepresentations. Hence the CRU in distorting information was manifestly in compliance with the University’s policies and practices. There is an urgent need for a wider remit, namely to look into the institutional failings of the UEA itself.

4. Declaration of interests: None.

5. DPA: I give permission for my name, and contact details, to be released.

Lalu Hanuman

January 2010

17 Responses to “UEA Culture of Corruption”

  1. curious said

    I think Lalu should produce the evidence he claims to have or explain why he did not include it with his submission.

  2. Jeff Id said

    I think you’re right. If Lulu has the evidence and someone can find him/her, I offer the use of tAV as an outlet. The accusations may be baseless in this case but with the other issues we’ve seen, it wouldn’t be that surprising.

  3. jimchip said

    meh, another disgruntled grad student. If only Lalu had said “CRU” and not just post-grad “UEA” I would have said “Lalu’s the one and Jeff was right!”.

    The post does go to a serious institutional problem that is pretty broad. That is treating the admins in charge of these places like they were independent and unaccountable while other (outside) politicos back them up. People can ‘feel’ when something is fouled-up at a U. Admins act weird, faculty get uptight, students are kept out… The opposite can also happen: Admins act ‘happy’ :), faculty get are loose (or clueless), some students are let in (after proper coaching)…There are places where it’s not like that, either way.

    Lalu’s comment is important to me because of the recent UEA blah blah regarding prima facie, ICO, FOI etc.

    I keep thinking, “Clue!…Clue musk!…Herd of clues! UEA, do ya get it?”

    ANS: No.

  4. frankbi said

    OK, so we have one submission to Parliament which makes baseless insinuations based on obviously false ‘facts’. And now we have another submission to Parliament which makes even stronger accusations, but with zero supporting evidence.

    I think what this shows is that the Parliamentary investigation has become a dumping ground of all sorts of random accusations by random individuals.

    What would you think if an ex-colleague of Steve McIntyre had simply made random unflattering claims about McIntyre’s past, and put these in a formal submission to the government? Would you be saying, ‘hey, maybe the accusations are baseless, but that’s OK, he just hasn’t produced the evidence yet’?

    It’s saying — ‘Gee this is corrupt followed by lets make more!!!’ I’ll never understand how people get so confused with political wrongthink but that’s the world these days.

    Nah, I think he’s just concern trolling. Pretending to support climate action, even as he’s actively working against it.

  5. John M said

    Frankbi

    Your deltoideus reference only repeats word games associated with the OIC “finding” and “private” e-mails, and makes some vague comment about data and methods related to proxy studies that is supposed to be self-evident, but simply reflects AGW talking points.

    But with regard to Lalu, it does appear he has an axe to grind,

    http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/1999/2086.html

    but if he’s the same guy, he’s not exactly cut from the “do nothing about climate change” cloth.

    http://www.thehopesanctuary.com/get-involved/hope-volunteers3.html
    http://bajanreporter.blogspot.com/2009/07/why-you-should-be-vegetarian-or-vegan.html

    Not that there’s anything wrong with veganism, “freeing Palestine” or “socializing” dogs, but not exactly the kind of guy thats fits Frankbi’s “Nah, I think he’s just concern trolling. Pretending to support climate action, even as he’s actively working against it” view.

    Frankbi’s view wrt to Lalu’s AGW opinion appears to be as gounded in fact as the potshots being taken at the IOP submission.

  6. jimchip said

    #4, Aw Frank, if it’s the same person, see also Lalu Hanuman v U.K. [2000] ELR 685.

    It would be interesting to see the evidence relevant to the CCE remit but Lalu might have a bone to pick just based on past disgruntlement. Maybe just lawyer’s advice to keep the appeal going?

    Not random (UEA). Dumping ground, maybe. (Personal) Concern trolling. Not pretending to support climate action…If this is the person I’m thinking of, they really support climate action. It’s OK if they’re a vegan.

    Relevance to the CCE remit, evidence beyond some admins, etc. fouled up in their case: I doubt it.

  7. P Gosselin said

    Everywhere one looks, one finds rotting meat.
    Now it appears OPCC WG3 was not any more professional than WG2, as Richard Tol writes here:
    http://klimazwiebel.blogspot.com/2010/02/richard-tol-on-wg3-of-ipcc.html

    “Chapter 11 of AR4 WG3 suggests that climate policy could stimulate economic growth and would create jobs. These claims are supported by gray literature only, and they are biased.”

    Again, lots of gray literature where “ambiguous findings are made into clear results”.
    WG3 further confirms that the IPCC 4AR is a propogandist advocacy manifesto.

  8. Kenneth Fritsch said

    Lalu Hanuman, spells no credibility in my book and certainly not worth quoting.

  9. Ian said

    Jeff:

    The accusations from Lalu, unsupported by documentary evidence, don’t seem to be worth repeating. It’s clear he’s got an axe to grind with the University – I wouldn’t waste much time with this given that there are far better contributions to the particular parliamentary committee.

  10. gallopingcamel said

    John M (@5),
    Thanks for showing that one needs needs to do a little digging to make sure there is no hidden agenda. Hanuman may have something but it needs to be more than mere allegations.

    I am with comments (@8) and (@9) on this one.

  11. An Elegant Chaos said

    After everything that has happened, it still pains me to have to say ‘please perform a simple fact check’ http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&q=%22Lalu+Hanuman%22&fp=33a9a577caa4e7cb If we are in the situation where IPCC failures are only now being found then the sceptics are just as guilty as the warmers about all of this.

    I dunno if Lalu is a plant or deluded, but I can see that he is a kerazzy person. I am sceptical because of the holes.

  12. Quite OT, but…

    For some reason, certain climate blogs are repeating an error from here to the moon.

    “It’s” stands in for “it is” and nothing else. Example: “It’s colder than we imagine.”

    “Its” is possessive. Example: “Climate science is riddled with errors. Its foundation is full of holes.”

    An easy way to remember the rules: You’ve got “it’s” for “it is” and everything else is “its.”

  13. John M said

    Someone once pointed out to me that we don’t write “hi’s” or “her’s”, so why would “it’s” be used as a possessive?

    That, especially the “hi’s” part, made it much easier to remember.

  14. dinosaur said

    By looking at point 2 it seems that LaLu is a Warmer and upset by the CRU for hiding data that proves mann-made globull warming.

    No wonder he/she sounds a little unhinged.

  15. nigguraths said

    I can recollect a current CRU post-doc who posted on RealClimate – seemed happy enough.

    Contrary to what Lalu seems to imply in his letter, Copenhagen did not fail because of the actions of the CRU or the UEA, as much as it did because of the revelations of these actions.

    If it did fail because of Climategate revelations at all…

  16. Max said

    Do you have any regrets?

  17. Gigih said

    plesae visit also my blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 140 other followers

%d bloggers like this: