Finally, the beginning of the end of the global warming fraud. IX.

The excerpt below is from a recent post on wattsupwiththat , detailing the chronology of the CRU email fiasco and the duplicity of CRU members, and indeed, of the office of the British Information Commissioner itself. There can no doubt in any right thinking person's mind, about the worthlessness of the global warming temperature conclusions as presented by the East Anglia Climate Research Unit. Eschenbach tightly chronicles the unfolding controversy, from his perspective of one of the major antagonists. The post is a long one, but should be read in its entirely, including the comments. This is a hugely significant developing story.

[...]

[By Willis Eschenbach]

"People seem to be missing the real issue in the CRU emails. Gavin over at realclimate keeps distracting people by saying the issue is the scientists being nasty to each other, and what Trenberth said, and the Nature “trick”, and the like. Those are side trails. To me, the main issue is the frontal attack on the heart of science, which is transparency.

Science works by one person making a claim, and backing it up with the data and methods that they used to make the claim. Other scientists then attack the claim by (among other things) trying to replicate the first scientist’s work. If they can’t replicate it, it doesn’t stand. So blocking the FOIA allowed Phil Jones to claim that his temperature record (HadCRUT3) was valid science.

This is not just trivial gamesmanship, this is central to the very idea of scientific inquiry. This is an attack on the heart of science, by keeping people who disagree with you from ever checking your work and seeing if your math is correct.

As far as I know, I am the person who made the original Freedom Of Information Act to CRU that started getting all this stirred up. I was trying to get access to the taxpayer funded raw data out of which they built the global temperature record. I was not representing anybody, or trying to prove a point. I am not funded by Mobil, I’m an amateur scientist with a lifelong interest in the weather and climate. I’m not “directed” by anyone, I’m not a member of a right-wing conspiracy. I’m just a guy trying to move science forwards.

The recent release of the hacked emails from CRU has provided me with an amazing insight into the attempt by myself, Steve McIntyre, and others from CA and elsewhere to obtain the raw station data from Phil Jones at the CRU. We wanted the data that was used to make the global temperature record that is relied on to claim “unprecedented” global warming. I want to give a chronological account of the interactions. While we don’t know if all of these emails are valid, the researchers involved such as Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann that clearly indicate that they think they are authentic They certainly fit with my experience. I have only included the relevant parts of emails, and indicated where I have snipped by an ellipsis (…)."

Mr. Eschenbach has detailed his brief here, in addition to what's in the WUWT post, and indicates this will be a work-in-progress as more analysis of the FOIA dump is done.

[...]