While I think some of the rhetoric is a bit ‘over the top’ (that may just be my generally emotionally flat nature, though…) and some of the conclusions step a bit beyond the strictly provable (there are some interpretations that could make a Jones statement more reasonable – even if a highly unlikely interpretation): the simple fact is that this is a ‘must read’ analysis of a series of the ClimateGate emails.
H/t to Another Ian in T2
Clearly a lot of work went into ‘connecting the dots’ and finding these emails. Gluing together the time line, and figuring out the meaning.
The net meaning is simple:
This is just stunning. He went from pretending to hide data from a scientific critic to admitting he does not have the data. And now we know more about why.
According to ’1′ he threw out (cherry picked?) data that did not fit their expectations and assumptions. That is clear and obvious. ’2′ is an admission all he has is the output of his calculations – not the inputs. So not only is the data he filtered out loss (and why he filtered it) what he has has been ‘adjusted’. It is this “selection” and “adjustment” process nf raw data that drives the gridded products. This is what everyone wants to confirm.
’3′ again indicates he does not even hold copies of the original data, but lets the NMSs overwrite data without any controls.
What a mess. [Strong criticism snipped… read it at the site. -E.M.Smith] All those people who believed Phil Jones was a qualified man of science with a clear audit trail of his work now know he was a shoddy […Um, yeah, hit the link… -E.M.Smith].
If this had been data on medical trials for drugs, structural testing for foundations, buildings or bridges, or safety data on cars, trains or planes the man would be fired and possibly charged with some form of criminal negligence. But this is climate science, where professional rules of conduct are apparently optional.
The article has links to a couple of other links that are also worth reading… I suspect it would be worth spending a day or so wandering through what he’s found…
Like this one where he goes through the “delete the email and dodge the FOI requests” emails: