posted on Nov, 25 2009 @ 05:31 PM
Originally posted by melatonin
And the apparent deletion of the AR4 emails would fit this comment. No deletion of requested information. Once the request is refused, they could do
what they like.
Even these attempts to string him up for his supposed compliance or non-compliance to the FOI act is just political BS. If you want him to step down
as head of CRU, I'm sure he won't be that bothered. The admin of heading a department only gets in the way of doing science.
You're still defending their deletion practices?
Here they admit that even the computer code is subject to FOIA, as I do think I recall you claiming it wouldnt be:
Thanks for the quick reply. The leaflet appeared so general, but it was prepared by UEA so they may have simplified things. From their wording,
computer code would be covered by the FOIA. My concern was if Sarah is/was still employed by UEA. I guess she could claim that she had only written
one tenth of the code and release every tenth line.
As for FOIA Sarah isn’t technically employed by UEA and she will likely be paid by Manchester Metropolitan University. I wouldn’t worry about the
code. If FOIA does ever get used by anyone, there is also IPR to consider as well. Data is covered by all the agreements we sign with people, so I
will be hiding behind them. I’ll be passing any requests onto the person at UEA who has been given a post to deal with them.
Suuuure, oooookay, he can "HIDE" behind certain obligations. But you argue as if there wasnt even intent to keep his numbers and methods secret. And
then you talk as if you know what they actually deleted. Breath-taking...
Is this all that's left? I know much of this is just attacks by anti-science ideologues, but you might want to at least try to give the
illusion of it being about the science.
Anti-science would be an ongoing concerted effort to stiffle the scientific method, on matters that just so happens to involve policy that begs for a
global government / tax.
Your arguments about their ethics and practices are flimsy, at best, yet you argue as if they're 100% justifiable and scientific. They cleary dont
have ethics. After Jones faces criminal charges and has to give up the millions in personal wealth he's made during this, he might give a public
apology at which point you might finally then admit to his evils. In the meantime, I hope you dont consider yourself a scientist in supporting the
unethics of these crooks.
BTW: If they werent secretive, they wouldnt be "harrassed".
And here goes an indepth history of them thwarting FOIA:
AND: The first comment on that article says it all:
One of the documents (the HARRY_READ_ME.txt file) is a THREE YEAR journal of a CRU programmer describing everything he tried with the data and
models in an attempt to reproduce existing results CRU had published. Comments in the file make it clear that “HARRY” tried FOR THREE YEARS to
recreate CRU’s published results AND FAILED.
Do you see the REAL significance of this because it is absolutely fatal to the credibility of anything CRU has produced.
What we have here is a documented THREE year effort by a CRU programmer, who had access to all the data, access to all the code, access to all the
people who developed the code and the models and still HE could still NOT duplicate CRU’s OWN results. If he can’t it simply means the CRU’s
results cannot be reproduced even by themselves and so there is no point anyone else even trying — CRU themselves have proven it’s a waste of time
and so they themselves have proven their own results are plain rubbish. That means any “peer reviewed” document CRU produced along with any other
papers that cited the CRU papers are based on data the CRU themselves can’t verify.
Besides, the absolutly sorry state of affairs in the data handling and software managment the HARRY_READ_ME.txt reveals, the utter and total mess of
CRU data and software this document reveals is WHY CRU has not released its data and model software.
Given the CRU is one of the most, if not the most cited sources of climate data — upon which trillions of dollars of economic policy is being set,
the importance of what the HARRY_READ_ME.txt file reveals becomes scary.
[edit on 25-11-2009 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]