Jump to content

Climatic Research Unit: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
ChrisO~enwiki (talk | contribs)
43,032 edits
"Resisting requests" is POV: you're stating the opinion of an op-ed writer as fact, which you must not do
added refs, tweaked wording
Line 6: Line 6:
In August 2006, the Climatic Research Building was named the [[Hubert Lamb]] Building after its first Director.
In August 2006, the Climatic Research Building was named the [[Hubert Lamb]] Building after its first Director.


The Climate Research Unit has been the target of attention by [[climate change sceptics]] who have made numerous requests under the [[Freedom of Information Act 2000|Freedom of Information Act]] for statistical data used by the unit's scientists. The science journal ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' reported that in the course of five days in July 2009 the CRU had been "inundated" with 58 FOI requests from analyst [[Stephen McIntyre]] and people affilitiated with his blog [[Climate Audit]]. The Climatic Research Unit stated that requests could not be fulfilled because of confidentiality agreements signed with the data's owners, including institutions in Spain, Germany, Bahrain and Norway, that restricted the data to academic use. In some cases the agreements were made verbally, and some of the written agreements had been lost during a move. The CRU's director, [[Phil Jones (climatologist)|Phil Jones]], told ''Nature'' that he was working to make the data publicly available with the agreement of its owners but this was expected to take some months, and objections were anticipated from national meteorological services that made money from selling the data.<ref>{{cite news|title=Climate data spat intensifies|date=12 August 2009|issue=460|page=787|work=[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]}}</ref> Writing in ''[[National Review]]'', Patrick J. Michaels of the [[Cato Institute]] argued that the unit's refusal to release the requested data was "much more than an academic spat" and that "U.S. taxpayers deserve to know the answer."<ref>{{cite news|last=Michaels|first=Patrick|title=The Dog Ate Global Warming|url=http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTBiMTRlMDQxNzEyMmRhZjU3ZmYzODI5MGY4ZWI5OWM|work=National Review Online|date=2009-09-23|accessdate=2009-11-26</ref>
After failing to provide data in response to requests by colleagues to [[Data sharing|share data]],<ref>Climate of Extremes: Global Warming Science They Don’t Want You to Know, Patrick J. Michaels (2009)</ref> <ref name="Guardian 20 Nov">{{cite web|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/20/climate-sceptics-hackers-leaked-emails |title=Climate sceptics claim leaked emails are evidence of collusion among scientists &#124; Environment |publisher=The Guardian |date= |accessdate=2009-11-24}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Climate data spat intensifies|date=12 August 2009|issue=460|page=787|work=[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]}}</ref> the Climate Research Unit has been the target of attention by [[climate change sceptics]] who have made numerous requests under the [[Freedom of Information Act 2000|Freedom of Information Act]] for statistical data used by the unit's scientists. The science journal ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'' reported that in the course of five days in July 2009 the CRU had been "inundated" with 58 FOI requests from analyst [[Stephen McIntyre]] and people affilitiated with his blog [[Climate Audit]]. The Climatic Research Unit stated that requests could not be fulfilled because of confidentiality agreements signed with the data's owners, including institutions in Spain, Germany, Bahrain and Norway, that restricted the data to academic use. In some cases the agreements were made verbally, and some of the written agreements had been lost during a move. The CRU's director, [[Phil Jones (climatologist)|Phil Jones]], told ''Nature'' that he was working to make the data publicly available with the agreement of its owners but this was expected to take some months, and objections were anticipated from national meteorological services that made money from selling the data.<ref>{{cite news|title=Climate data spat intensifies|date=12 August 2009|issue=460|page=787|work=[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]}}</ref> Writing in ''[[National Review]]'', Patrick J. Michaels of the [[Cato Institute]] argued that the unit's refusal to release the requested data was "much more than an academic spat" and that "U.S. taxpayers deserve to know the answer."<ref>{{cite news|last=Michaels|first=Patrick|title=The Dog Ate Global Warming|url=http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTBiMTRlMDQxNzEyMmRhZjU3ZmYzODI5MGY4ZWI5OWM|work=National Review Online|date=2009-09-23|accessdate=2009-11-26</ref>


== E-mail controversy ==
== E-mail controversy ==

Revision as of 19:19, 26 November 2009

The Climatic Research Unit is a component of the University of East Anglia and is one of the leading institutions[1] concerned with the study of natural and anthropogenic climate change.

It has around thirty research scientists and students and has developed a number of the data sets widely used in climate research, including the global temperature record used to monitor the state of the climate system,[2] as well as statistical software packages and climate models.[3]

In August 2006, the Climatic Research Building was named the Hubert Lamb Building after its first Director.

After failing to provide data in response to requests by colleagues to share data,[4] [5][6] the Climate Research Unit has been the target of attention by climate change sceptics who have made numerous requests under the Freedom of Information Act for statistical data used by the unit's scientists. The science journal Nature reported that in the course of five days in July 2009 the CRU had been "inundated" with 58 FOI requests from analyst Stephen McIntyre and people affilitiated with his blog Climate Audit. The Climatic Research Unit stated that requests could not be fulfilled because of confidentiality agreements signed with the data's owners, including institutions in Spain, Germany, Bahrain and Norway, that restricted the data to academic use. In some cases the agreements were made verbally, and some of the written agreements had been lost during a move. The CRU's director, Phil Jones, told Nature that he was working to make the data publicly available with the agreement of its owners but this was expected to take some months, and objections were anticipated from national meteorological services that made money from selling the data.[7] Writing in National Review, Patrick J. Michaels of the Cato Institute argued that the unit's refusal to release the requested data was "much more than an academic spat" and that "U.S. taxpayers deserve to know the answer."[8]

E-mail controversy

Main article: Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident

In November 2009 hackers broke into a server used by the CRU and stole a large quantity of data, anonymously posting online more than 1,000 emails and more than 2,000 other documents found.[9][10] Some climate change sceptics asserted that a number of the leaked e-mails were evidence that scientists had conspired to manipulate data to strengthen the evidence for anthropogenic climate change[11] and to keep scientists who have contrary views out of peer-review literature, though the first of these accusations has been denied.[12] The CRU's researchers stated that the e-mails had been taken out of context and merely reflected an honest exchange of ideas.[13] Phil Jones, Director of the Climatic Research Unit, called the charges that the emails involve any "untoward" activity "ludicrous."[14]

References

  1. ^ Brown, Craig (8 February 2005). "The forecast for Scotland: wet, wet, wet". The Scotsman. Retrieved 2008-11-01.
  2. ^ "Global temperature 2008: Another top-ten year". Met Office. 2008-01-03. Retrieved 2008-11-01.
  3. ^ "About the Climatic Research Unit". Retrieved 2008-05-05.
  4. ^ Climate of Extremes: Global Warming Science They Don’t Want You to Know, Patrick J. Michaels (2009)
  5. ^ "Climate sceptics claim leaked emails are evidence of collusion among scientists | Environment". The Guardian. Retrieved 2009-11-24.
  6. ^ "Climate data spat intensifies". Nature. No. 460. 12 August 2009. p. 787.
  7. ^ "Climate data spat intensifies". Nature. No. 460. 12 August 2009. p. 787.
  8. ^ {{cite news|last=Michaels|first=Patrick|title=The Dog Ate Global Warming|url=http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTBiMTRlMDQxNzEyMmRhZjU3ZmYzODI5MGY4ZWI5OWM%7Cwork=National Review Online|date=2009-09-23|accessdate=2009-11-26
  9. ^ "Hackers target leading climate research unit". BBC News. 20 November 2009.
  10. ^ "Climate Strife Comes to Light". The Wall Street Journal. 23 November 2009.
  11. ^ Revkin, Andrew. (2009, Nov. 20). Hacked E-Mail Is New Fodder for Climate Dispute. New York Times. Global Edition: Environment. Accessed 11-23-2009.
  12. ^ Webster, Ben (21 November 2009). "Sceptics publish climate e-mails 'stolen from East Anglia University'". The Times.
  13. ^ Eilperin, Juliet (21 November 2009). "Hackers steal electronic data from top climate research center". The Washington Post.
  14. ^ "East Anglia University Statement on Hacking of Climate Research Unit Emails". UEA CRU. 21 November 2009.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Climatic_Research_Unit&oldid=328084573"