cc: "Summers Brian Mr (REG)" , "Preece Alan Mr (MAC)" date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:37:59 +0100 from: "Davies Trevor Prof (ENV)" subject: RE: FW: Climate Research Centre crisis spreads to: "Jones Philip Prof (ENV)" , "Ogden Annie Ms (MAC)" , "Briffa Keith Prof (ENV)" Phil I shouldn't correspond with Robinson if I were you. I think the right approach is to remain aloof & not get dragged into an argy-bargy - which is what they want. When there is clearly something libellous, as in the Spectator, we should respond (as we have done) in a low key way. I now hope that our solicitor will see it in the clear-cut way in which I interpret that nature and the falsity of the accusation. We should continue to remain "above it" as much as we can. Trevor >-----Original Message----- >From: Phil Jones [mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk] >Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 3:41 PM >To: Ogden Annie Ms (MAC); Briffa Keith Prof (ENV) >Cc: Davies Trevor Prof (ENV); Summers Brian Mr (REG); Preece >Alan Mr (MAC) >Subject: Re: FW: Climate Research Centre crisis spreads > > > Annie, > Keith's response is almost written. He is just awaiting for one >piece of additional information from the Russians. Hopefully this >will be up by the end of the week. > > Thanks for following up with the Spectator. > > If you want me to email this David Robinson then I can do. It is >difficult to stop this sort of rubbish spreading across the internet. >No CRU work is flawed. If it hadn't been this issue then it would >have been something else. They are just getting at us because we are >not responding to them. > > I have been to a couple of meetings recently - a summer school in >Italy early last week and a meeting at the Royal Society last >Thursday. There were no comments or discussions about the issue. The >only time the issue was raised was over a coffee, and then it was >people wishing us well and wondering how we put up with it. Climate >scientists know it is all rubbish. As they told me, science is done >through publications, not via blog sites. > > I'd expect that we will reopen all these blog sites once something >goes up on the CRU site. > > Maybe when it all dies down later in the year, UEA/ENV/CRU need to >consider what we have learned from the alleged scandal. Should we >have responded differently, for example, and if so how? At the >moment, I don't see how we could have responded any >differently. Despite all the publicity, there are at least 3 people >in the US who have had it much worse than us and they are still >writing normal papers in the literature. > > Cheers > Phil > > >At 15:16 20/10/2009, Ogden Annie Ms (MAC) wrote: >>Dear Phil and Keith, >>Marcus has just received this message below from the EDP environment >>correspondent. He is telling her he knows nothing about it (true, as >>he has just returned from China). >> >>I have just dropped a note to the solicitor asking if she sees any >>problem in our warning her to be very cautious in how anything is >>phrased and issuing a statement along the following lines. (I think >>the last line would have to come directly from you Keith) >> >>For info, still no response from the Spectator to the letter. I have >>rung three times (fist time PA told me message had been opened) and >>emailed. Solicitor is now looking closely at the piece in the >>Spectator to judge whether to send a solicitor's letter. >>Best, Annie >> >> >>Draft statement >>Any implication that Professor Keith Briffa deliberately selected >>tree-ring data in order to manufacture evidence of recent dramatic >>warming in the Yamal region of northern Russia is completely >>false. A full rebuttal is published on the Climatic Research >Unit's website. >> >>This stems from a report on the Climate Audit blog site - a site >>for climate change sceptics. The blog's editor, Steve McIntyre, has >>produced an alternative history of tree-growth changes in the Yamal >>region by substituting some of the data used in Prof Briffa's >>published and peer-reviewed analysis, with recent data from a more >>localised origin than the data analysed by Prof Briffa. While >>McIntyre's selection produces a different result, it cannot be >>considered to be more authoritative. >> >>This appears to be an attempt to discredit the work of the >>Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change in the run-up to the >>Copenhagen climate talks. >> >> >>------------------------------- >>Annie Ogden, Head of Communications, >>University of East Anglia, >>Norwich, NR4 7TJ. >>Tel:+44 (0)1603 592764 >>www.uea.ac.uk/comm >>............................................ >> >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Armes Marcus Mr (VCO) >>Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 2:40 PM >>To: Ogden Annie Ms (MAC) >>Subject: FW: Climate Research Centre crisis spreads >> >> Here it is Annie >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Greaves, Tara [mailto:Tara.Greaves@archant.co.uk] >>Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 12:11 PM >>To: Armes Marcus Mr (VCO) >>Subject: FW: Climate Research Centre crisis spreads >> >>Also, do you know anything about this? >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: David_Robinson [mailto:darobin@netcomuk.co.uk] >>Sent: 19 October 2009 22:45 >>To: newsdesk@archant.co.uk >>Subject: Climate Research Centre crisis spreads >> >>Sir, >>I draw your attention to the growing international climate change >>scandal that is engulfing the CRU and dragging the reputation of it, >>and Norfolk, through the mud. >> >>After several weeks of open criticism of the use of a particular, >>alledgedly flawed, CRU dataset there has been no attempted rebuttle >>by the CRU. Latest information suggests that dozens of 'peer >>reviewed' scientific papers that relied on the same dataset are now >>'similarly flawed' and should be withdrawn. This, unfortunately, >>draws into question a fundamental part of the IPCC conclusion - >>namely, whether the recent global warming is in fact abnormal and >>hence attributable to man. >> >>I think the continued silence by the CRU on this subject profoundly >>worrying given the importance of the topic. >> >>Any light you can shed on this whole sorry story would be greatly in >>the public interest, especially given the Copenhagen summit >fast approaching. >> >>David Robinson >> >>http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7374#comments >>--- >>Sent via BlackBerry >>David Robinson MSc >>Blacklock and Bowers Limited >> >>This email and any attachments to it are confidential and intended >>solely for the individual or organisation to whom they are addressed. >>You must not copy or retransmit this e-mail or its attachments in >>whole or in part to anyone else without our permission. The views >>expressed in them are those of the individual author and do not >>necessarily represent the views of this Company. >> >>Whilst we would never knowingly transmit anything containing a virus >>we cannot guarantee that this e-mail is virus-free and you should >>take all steps that you can to protect your systems against viruses. >> >>Archant Regional Limited, is registered in England under Company >>Registration Number 19300, and the Registered Office is Prospect >>House, Rouen Road, Norwich NR1 1RE. > >Prof. Phil Jones >Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090 >School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784 >University of East Anglia >Norwich Email p.jones@uea.ac.uk >NR4 7TJ >UK >--------------------------------------------------------------- >------------- > > >