It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Climategate goes SERIAL: now the Russians confirm that UK climate scientists manipulated data to exa

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 08:43 AM
link ta-to-exaggerate-global-warming/

By James Delingpole Politics Last updated: December 16th, 2009

Climategate just got much, much bigger. And all thanks to the Russians who, with perfect timing, dropped this bombshell just as the world’s leaders are gathering in Copenhagen to discuss ways of carbon-taxing us all back to the dark ages.

Feast your eyes on this news release from Rionovosta, via the Ria Novosti agency, posted on Icecap. (Hat Tip: Richard North)

A discussion of the November 2009 Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident, referred to by some sources as “Climategate,” continues against the backdrop of the abortive UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen (COP15) discussing alternative agreements to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that aimed to combat global warming.

The incident involved an e-mail server used by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, East England. Unknown persons stole and anonymously disseminated thousands of e-mails and other documents dealing with the global-warming issue made over the course of 13 years.

Controversy arose after various allegations were made including that climate scientists colluded to withhold scientific evidence and manipulated data to make the case for global warming appear stronger than it is.

Climategate has already affected Russia. On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory. Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports. Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.

The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.

The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.

On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.

IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.

The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world’s land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.

Global-temperature data will have to be modified if similar climate-date procedures have been used from other national data because the calculations used by COP15 analysts, including financial calculations, are based on HadCRUT research.

Link to article From Rionovosta:

Now, if only the U.S. would really tackle this, but we all know they won't.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 08:50 AM
reply to post by Libertygal

There is already a post about the topic, please filter post under their specific topic, this spider web effect of a single topic but many threads is causing to much havoc on this website.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 09:16 AM
reply to post by Eavel

My apologies, mods please lock then, I didn't see the post.

posted on Dec, 17 2009 @ 10:43 AM
I'll get in before the potential lock to say that Dellingpole is a serial BSer, for sure.

Has anyone actually bothered to look at the IEA report?

Go have a look-see. All they point out is that there are a large number of stations in Russia that are not included in the CRU dataset. Not surprising since the CRU have been collecting this data for decades and Russia hasn't always been the most open source of information. Anyways, once included in the data, the early period around 1850-1900 was (significantly) not as cold as with the more restricted data. Cool. If the data is fine we should use it.

However, it shows little difference during most the 20th century and into the 21st. Minimal. Nothing of note.

Dellingpole is a BSer.

Page 20 compares the 152 station Russian dataset with the 90 station dataset (which CRU have been using).

One of the long-term criticisms of HADCRUT in general is that it doesn't cover large sections of the earth (the poles), so this is nothing new. GISS does though.

[edit on 17-12-2009 by melatonin]

top topics

log in