WSJ summary of climate research center data breach

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125883405294859215.html

by nwatson • 17 years ago

7 11 17 years ago

online.wsj.com

tokenadult• 17 years ago

"In other email exchanges related to the FOIA requests, some U.K. researchers asked foreign scientists to delete all emails related to their work for the upcoming IPCC summary. In others, they discussed boycotting scientific journals that require them to make their data public."

That's all the more reason for all reputable journals to be united in requiring that authors publishing in their journal be required to make their data sets available to independent researchers, so only disreputable journals publish articles by authors who engage in such research-slowing tactics.

sleepingbot• 17 years ago

Isn't it a bit strange that this comes just weeks before COP15 in Copenhagen, the same summit the United States and China will not take seriously?

Lobbyist already working on it, as I see.

cwan• 17 years ago

Seriously? Let's assume that it was timed for maximum exposure and maximum impact. Let's also ignore the fact that many oil lobbyists are now for a climate pact so that they can make billions off the trade of carbon credits. Don't you see an issue with the underlying substance of the emails if they turn out to be true?

I find it remarkable that there are so many people here who would argue against accountability - especially when public funding and the public interest is involved (per your previous comment, accountability and transparency isn't just for banks). If these emails turn out to be true, if anything this shows that these scientists are not disinterested empiricists but have activist agendas. But this also doesn't mean that they aren't right. The issue could be solved by publishing their data sets and code for their models for public scrutiny and yet they do not - despite being largely publicly funded. Do you not see a problem with this?

camccann4• 17 years ago

Seriously, how many posts about this do we really need?

robotrout2• 17 years ago

I'm loving it, but I do get your point. This particular posting, however, is especially relevant to me, as I had been noting with dismay, the silence of the mainstream media on this. To have the WSJ acknowledging the event (which I didn't know before this post) is reassuring.

camccann4• 17 years ago

Well, frankly, I think it's obnoxious.

I wouldn't mind if it had anything to do with actual science, but this is just political fluff to make people feel good about their preconceived notions. HN's front page got spammed with it because it appeals to the political groupthink here, and the scientifically-illiterate mainstream media talking it up is only going to create more drama and less insight.

But I guess being more interested in science than ideology puts me in the minority around here, so whatever. Time to collect more downvotes, I suppose.

jpcx01• 17 years ago

This seems important because WSJ reporting on it, which will give the story exposure to all the talk radio stations and fox news who will probably cause some political ruckus over the next week, especially given the upcoming copenhagen conference.

WSJ summary of climate research center data breach

Related Stories