Weather Forecast


Letter: E-mails stolen, so aren't credible is fallacy, he says

TO THE EDITOR: Mr. Zaudke's straw man fallacy is at work again: The e-mails were stolen, so they are not credible.

A small but a notable group of global warming scientists are altering data and hiding their work, but that has no bearing on anything. Zaudke never divulges any information on the issue.

Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, two Canadians who have devoted years to seeking the raw data and codes used in climate graphs and models, then fact-checking the published conclusions.

They have been after the CRU station data for years, said Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit and one of the world's leading climate scientists and one of the authors of the e-mails, to "Mike." Judging by the e-mail thread, this refers to Michael Mann, (the author of the debunked hockey stick graph he concocted by minimizing the Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice Age) director of the Pennsylvania State University's Earth System Science Center.

In the e-mails, scientists appear to urge each other to present a "unified" view on the theory of man-made climate change while discussing the importance of the "common cause"; to advise each other on how to smooth over data so as not to compromise the favored hypothesis; to discuss ways to keep opposing views out of leading journals; and to give tips on how to "hide the decline"

of temperature in certain inconvenient data.

Example: Jones to Mr. Mann in May 2008: "Mike, Can you delete any e-mails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. . . .Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same?"

AR4 is shorthand for the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change's (IPCC) Fourth report. I'll continue this in another letter.