funsec mailing list archives
Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate!
From: "David Lodge" <dave () cirt net>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 23:57:56 -0000
On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 19:28:15 -0000, RandallM <randallm () fidmail com> wrote:
someone better look in to the the "tree rings". That seems to be the cause of the debacle. perhaps the reason for the "blow up and hack". Didn't seem to correlate with their plans.
And the whole principle is nicely explained by the reg: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/29/yamal_scandal/ In essence, the majority of the used datasets for tree rings come from just 12 trees in a small area of Siberia, and, as we know, the whole world has a similar climate to Siberia. Climate never changes in one region and the whole world is *exactly* like Siberia. I take a "may be persuaded-sceptical" view of climate change: there's definitely a definitive agenda being followed with a bias towards pro-climate change in the media (especially the BBC - any anti-climate change views are put as "look at these idiots") and the science community as a whole. Scientists have been ridiculed just for voicing an opposing theory to climate change being caused by human released carbon derivatives[1][2]. What we're seeing is a one sided argument, with no dissenters *allowed* to put forward theories or opinions and as much fervour been cast against them as in the average Dawkins-followers rant against religion. In simple essence: the study of global climate is a vastly complicated field, for which we're getting better, but most of the time we don't know enough. We're looking at very small datasets, with very small timescales and guessing. In every other field of science, different theories would be put forward[3] and tested. In climatology, the "correct" theory has already been decided and any dissenting views are automatically wrong. In terms of whether the hack/leak was right. Maybe: Legally, it is wrong. If it was a hack, it is against the UK CMA (criminal), if it was an insider leak then there's several criminal or civil laws that it could've breached. Ethically and morally is on shaky ground. The CRU has a history of deliberately avoiding releasing information and being obtrusive. It has refused many FOI requests for reasonable data and has tried to backtrack on it's own errors (e.g. when it accidentally left data on an anonymous ftp account), which automatically makes them look in the wrong. But, two wrongs don't make a right; in a perfect world, the FOI should have been handled by the Information Commissioner, but in the real world, he is pretty toothless and left to his management the information wouldn't have seen the light of day. I draw the comparison here to the MPs expenses scandal: the legal ways had been tried and rejected. The IC was toothless. Leaked data finally showed that dodgy things were being done and forced *all* the data into the public domain which may even lead to prosecution for several MPs. dave [1] It's not just CO2, methane is just as bad. [2] I despair when I hear "plans" being put forward by the governments - most of them are next to useless; even climate change is being caused by humans: if you have to make a difference, start at the top, with things like underground coal fires or cow belches, not at the bottom with sodding mobile phone chargers being left plugged in! [3] E.g. solar activity, solar magnetic strength ad nauseam. _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate!, (continued)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! Larry Seltzer (Nov 27)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 27)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! Martin Tomasek (Nov 27)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 27)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! Martin Tomasek (Nov 27)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! Rob, grandpa of Ryan, Trevor, Devon & Hannah (Nov 27)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 27)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! Ned Fleming (Nov 27)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! RandallM (Nov 26)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! RandallM (Nov 27)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! RandallM (Nov 27)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! David Lodge (Nov 27)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! RandallM (Nov 28)
- Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! Larry Seltzer (Nov 27)