The blogosphere is alive this morning with the news that many more emails regarding the inner workings of the IPCC and associated anthropogenic global warming proponents have been released by a still unknown agent.
Following are some examples of email excerpts posted on the Air Vent site. Keep in mind that these excerpts are without context. These excerpts purport to show that a small group is trying to manipulate the data and the public perception:
Basic problem is that all models are wrong – not got enough middle and low level clouds.
Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. Phil, hopefully we can find time to discuss these further if necessary […]
I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run.
Presumably this one refers to Michael Mann’s hockey stick graph:
Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive […] there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC […]
It seems that a few people have a very strong say, and no matter how much talking goes on beforehand, the big decisions are made at the eleventh hour by a select core group.
Getting people we know and trust [into IPCC] is vital – hence my comment about the tornadoes group.
I agree with the importance of extreme events as foci for public and governmental opinion […] ‘climate change’ needs to be present in people’s daily lives. They should be reminded that it is a continuously occurring and evolving phenomenon
the important thing is to make sure they’re losing the PR battle. That’s what the site [Real Climate] is about.
Having established scale and urgency, the political challenge is then to turn this from an argument about the cost of cutting emissions – bad politics – to one about the value of a stable climate – much better politics. […] the most valuable thing to do is to tell the story about abrupt change as vividly as possible
[FOI, temperature data]
Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden. I’ve discussed this with the main funder (US Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.
The British newspaper, The Guardian, has more on the story. Initially there had been a question about the authenticity of the purported emails, but the Guardian story quotes Michael Mann as saying they look genuine.
This new release of additional emails comes just a week before the big United Nations climate change conference in Durban, South Africa.
Searchable database of Climategate 2 emails: http://foia2011.org/
See my post on the original Climategate of two years ago here.