Pachauri at the summit - Reuters
The most popular defense by the climate scientists caught with their pants down is:
“It’s only a few emails taken out of context.”
Have the people making this comment actually read the emails? Here’s just a few I’ve previously documented a couple:
Phil Jones – Emails taken out of context
In December 2008, Jones talks about deleting “loads of emails“. In May 2008, Jones asks colleagues to “delete any emails you may have“. When asked by a journalist in November 2009 Jones claims that “We’ve not deleted any emails or data“.
Email: Ed Cook and Keith Briffa
In this exchange, Cook is trying to convince Briffa to lay all the cards on the table regarding climate reconstructions. “Be honest. Lay it all out on the table and don’t start by assuming that ANY reconstruction is better than any other.” Later in the email he says they don’t know anything about the climate more than 100 years ago: “but honestly know fuck-all about what the >100 year variability was like with any certainty (i.e. we know with certainty that we know fuck-all).” Seems pretty clear to me that Cook is tired of having research dressed up to suit political needs.
A few emails out of context? Give me a break.
Don’t believe me? Read the emails for yourself here, here [link broken], or here and make your own decision.
