They were subject to a FOIA request that was being stalled.
Sorry - completely and utterly false.
These were several thousand internal mails taken 2 years ago without authorisation from a backup server at the Climate Research Unit at UEA. They were filtered and quote-mined and an unsuccessful attempt was then made to hack the Realclimate website and leave the files there. Notwithstanding the lack of ethics in publishing correspondence without permission, it is near-certain that an offence was committed. This blogger was one of the first direct recipients and Plod are probably looking for any clues as to the identity of the hacker.
The ensuing tulipstorm led to investigations by Parliament, universities and the US EPA, all of whch exonerated the scientists. The EPA found
Myths vs. Facts: Denial of Petitions for Reconsideration of the Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act | Regulatory Initiatives | Climate Change | U.S. EPA
Sorry - completely and utterly false.
These were several thousand internal mails taken 2 years ago without authorisation from a backup server at the Climate Research Unit at UEA. They were filtered and quote-mined and an unsuccessful attempt was then made to hack the Realclimate website and leave the files there. Notwithstanding the lack of ethics in publishing correspondence without permission, it is near-certain that an offence was committed. This blogger was one of the first direct recipients and Plod are probably looking for any clues as to the identity of the hacker.
The ensuing tulipstorm led to investigations by Parliament, universities and the US EPA, all of whch exonerated the scientists. The EPA found
The media coverage after the emails were released was based on email statements quoted out of context and on unsubstantiated theories of conspiracy. The CRU emails do not show either that the science is flawed or that the scientific process has been compromised. EPA carefully reviewed the CRU emails and found no indication of improper data manipulation or misrepresentation of results.
Comment