the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

Climategate 3.0

Posted by Jeff Id on March 13, 2013

The password for the remaining emails was sent to me and several other blogs last night.   Anthony Watts has the letter up and it should explain a little about what is going on.

14 Responses to “Climategate 3.0”

  1. Matthew W said

    Probably won’t be anything earth shattering, but lots of small talk in the emails could add up to be a lot of behind the scenes activity.
    Might just find out how may professional warmists aren’t very fond of Mr. Mann !!

  2. RomanM said

    Rats! He skipped me this time. 😦

  3. Jeff Condon said

    I can’t read that many emails. Has anyone released the password yet so that the crowd can search through them?

    We already know what the jokers did so it is hard for me to care enough to read.

    I’m sure Steve could put together a few completed stories from this but I’m not sure he will.

  4. Mosher left comments at my blog. It sounds like he’s making some sort of catalog/index/ cleaned up version. He’s got scripts grinding.

  5. omanuel said

    Historical records confirm: Truth is stranger than fiction!

    Climategate is the long-term consequence of a crisis of conscience involving two British authors of science fiction, George Orwell and Fred Hoyle in 1945-46: George Orwell and Fred Hoyle.

  6. ArndB said

    Hi Jeff,
    just as a kind reminder!
    At „Comment 10“ at, Climategate commenced with the text:

    “FOIA said
    November 17, 2009 at 9:57 pm
    We feel that climate science is, in the current situation, 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.
    This is a limited time offer, download now: http…………cont“.

    The post on 13 Nov. 2009 was about an Open Letter concerning a Letter, which 18 leading scientific organisations had written to the US Senate in October 2009. The Open Letter asked the heads of the organisations:
    ___“How could it happen that more than a dozen of the most prestigious scientific associations signed and submitted this letter on ‘climate change’ without having ensured that the used terminology is sufficiently defined. Good science can and is required to work with reasonable terms and explanations. ……cont/.” Both letters here:
    Luckily FOIA’s fight is impressive and successful. The climate definition matter is as flawed and inadequate as ever. A recent posting is titled “Roger Pielke Sr. and Climate Definition….cont/) here:
    Thanks for placing the Nov.2009- post then and best regards ArndB

  7. Phil said

    Jeff, no need to release the password into the public domain. Just place ALL the emails into a MYSQL database and link it to an online search, the way the earlier climategate emails were–the search code automatically redacts the email headers/footers, email addresses and phone numbers, leaving just the body of the email messages, which is where the pertinent info will be. A few bloggers won’t be able to read 200,000+ emails–if it takes 5 minutes to read an email, 5 x 200,000 = approx. 16,666 hours = 694 days to read all the emails. This is something that needs to be crowd-sourced.

    • HaroldW said

      Phil –
      That would be irresponsible. Redacting email addresses and phone numbers is a good first step. But that wouldn’t cover all personal details. The body of the emails may contain equally private matters such as health, financial or relationship information. Releases should be restricted to emails on professional topics only.

      I agree that the volume of emails is a hurdle. No doubt Mr. FOIA made a calculation such as yours to decide that he couldn’t possibly fully filter the emails alone. But relevant search terms have already identified the most likely emails. I rather doubt that there will be anything new of significance in the remainder (although it may fill in some details of, say, journal arm-twisting).

  8. TimTheToolMan said

    There were a dozen or so of you weren’t there? Could you just agree to take on responsibility for 12th the emails each? That would cut it down to a somewhat more manageable 20k.

  9. […] dos webs en las que apareció el comentario de FOIA en 2009 recibieron esa clave de forma privada (fuente,fuente,fuente). Como parte del mensaje en el que transmitía la clave FOIA explicaba sus motivos […]

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: