Climategate Leader Steps Aside for Now

|

Phil Jones

Phil Jones, the head of the Climatic Research Unit at the center of the Climategate affair, has stepped down temporarily pending the results of an independent investigation. The University of East Anglia press release states:

Professor Phil Jones has today announced that he will stand aside as Director of the Climatic Research Unit until the completion of an independent Review resulting from allegations following the hacking and publication of emails from the Unit.

Professor Jones said: "What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible.  After a good deal of consideration I have decided that the best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the Director's role during the course of the independent review and am grateful to the University for agreeing to this.  The Review process will have my full  support."  

Vice-Chancellor Professor Edward Acton said: "I have accepted Professor Jones's offer to stand aside during this period. It is an important step to ensure that CRU can continue to operate normally and the independent review can conduct its work into the allegations.

"We will announce details of the Independent Review, including its terms of reference, timescale and the chair, within days. I am delighted that Professor Peter Liss, FRS, CBE, will become acting director."

Although astute Reason commenters (take a bow) reported this some hours ago in their comments to my column, "The Scientific Tragedy of Climategate", I think it merits its own blogpost.

NEXT: Bipartisan Consensus: Going Rogue Offensively Bad

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. So he’s stepping aside temporarily? On full pay no doubt? Wonderful, that’s less than even Monbiot wanted. You should have got Radley to blog this.

    1. He’s busy, a cop somewhere tased somebody.

    2. He is only stepping down as director. Most likely, he will be continuing work on whatever research projects he is currently working on. It’s not like they made him turn in his gun and badge.

  2. That’s so nice of Phil to take one for the team.

  3. Fuckerpants.

  4. Grid shirt (SCIENCE!), stripey gift sweater, and a Mr. Wizard slime-over. Damn. I hadn’t pictured him so dorky. Forgot to convert to Euros.

    1. Ouch. I’ve had that shirt and that sweater, or close enough. So, I’m a geek. At least I’ve got fabulous hair.

  5. Deconstructing a flim-flam artist’s comments:

    Professor Jones said: “What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible.

    We need to keep shoveling it thick here, guys.

    “After a good deal of consideration I have decided that the best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the Director’s role during the course of the independent review and am grateful to the University for agreeing to this.”

    Thank you for not trying to save your hides just yet by sacking me summarily – you’re still true believers in the cause.

    “The Review process will have my full support.”

    As long as the review process is done with the same level of transparency and objectivity that my department followed.

    1. All what’s missing is the “I needed more time with my family” routine.

      1. I want him to say that he will be spending more time with Elliot Spitzer’s family.

  6. No! I refuse to believe it! The science is settled! The planet is melting! The knowledgeable sages have spoken! Bushes went up in flames! Peer review is the key! Consensus is rampant!

  7. In other news, ACORN is considering changing its name.

    1. Yeah, I heard that in the Glenn Beck program yesterday…

    2. National
      Understanding &
      Tolerance
      Society

  8. Vice-Chancellor Professor Edward Acton: “We will announce details of the Independent Review, including its terms of reference, timescale and the chair, within days. I am delighted that Professor Peter Liss, FRS, CBE, will become acting director.”

    … we expect the results to be peer reviewed and become settled science wiht a consensus of like-thinking individuals, just like our previous noble work.

    [Sorry, I cannot stop being a cynic. I mean, can one really believe these bullshit artists? The University will have an “independent” review, by whom? A bunch of guys from the same University? That’s like having an Internal Affairs investigation and equally effective. Pffth!]

  9. Folks,

    A question to ask at an AGW discussion.

    Did Humans cause the Holcene?
    There are two and only two answers to this:

    A: Yes
    B: No

    If the answer is A then we, as a species, are probably screwed. I mean, if ~100k proto-humans caused the end of the last ice age then we have no hope. If we can’t roast our dinner over a fire then we can’t sustain an industry.

    If the answer is B then at most humans are accelerating the pace of this warming.

    I sometimes feel like Cassiopeia.

    … Hobbit

    1. crap, even with Preview I misspelled Holocene.

      .. Hobbit

      1. Did you mean to say “Cassandra”?

        1. Oops. Time warped below.

        2. Did you mean to “Holo-deck”?

  10. crap and triple crap

    I didn’t mean “Cassiopeia”, I meant “Cassandra”.

    I guess I’ll go back to lurking.

    … Hobbit

    1. Yeah, when you misspel the crucial historical period, then misreference your key point of irony, I’m going to think you noted some hidden fact which devastates the current scientific consensus, a fact which thousands of trained experts just happened to miss in their mad rush to push SocialistHiddenAgenda…

      Please will you people get over yourselves!

      1. “Misspel” ??? LOL!

        It’s “misspell”. So if you can’t write in English, your whole argument is not sound.

      2. I agree with Francis, MNG. You are a disappointment and it is destroying your family.

  11. Let’s sing this guy Las Golondrinas, a nice “Goodbye” song from my land:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v….._embedded#

  12. You know, what really gets my blood boiling is the fact that politicians are ready to plunder all of our productive efforts based on the flim flam created by these bullshit artists. I can perfectly forgive scientists that screw up that have the balls to admit it, go back to the drawing board and try again. I can even forgive scientists getting caught in the enthusiasm of their research.

    But what I cannot and will NEVER forgive is a group of cranks, of charlatans, that were going as far as PRESCRIBING how I am supposed to LIVE MY LIFE based on their LIES.

    And what I find even more outrageous is these leftist crackpots that were (and are still) willing to sell us all into slavery only to see their pet social engineering experiments come to be. Their hatred of free people is so pervasive that they still grasp at lies and deceit to keep their agendas alive.

    Self-deluded fools.

    1. they still grasp at lies and deceit to keep their agendas alive

      They always have and always will. It is the way of The Left. Telling lies to advance The Cause is a noble thing to do.

      Making us live the way they’ve decided we should is all this was ever about.

      1. Hey, we’ve been taking some cues from Strauss and the Neo-cons.

    2. You must be new here.

    3. But what I cannot and will NEVER forgive is a group of cranks, of charlatans, that were going as far as PRESCRIBING how I am supposed to LIVE MY LIFE based on their LIES.

      Why are you a denier, denier? Why can’t you admit you’re in league with the oil companies and the Republicans?

      (Sorry, just filling in for Tony. He’s out heartsick.)

    4. They are retarded fetuses.

      1. “They always have and always will. It is the way of The Left Authoritarian types, particularly politically-connected ones. Telling lies to advance The Cause is a noble thing to do.”

        FIFY

        1. errata: the Left

    5. OM, I’m willing to bet no one is thinking of your paltry productive efforts.

      Yes OM, leftists are just thinking of ways to restrict human productity just for shits and giggles. It has nothing to do with all those scientists whom we humbly defer to in their relevant fields, it’s just a blatant power grab for fun.

      You live in a bizarre fantasy world.

      1. No, not for shits and giggles. For power and money.

      2. es OM, leftists are just thinking of ways to restrict human productity just for shits and giggles.

        Not for shits and giggles. It’s because they are losers and/or loser sympathizers who cannot stand the horrible disparity between the wealth of the doers, who they imagine are all Republicans who got ahead through all kinds of short-cuts, and the mouth breathing loafers (edited to remove the offensive term “slackers”). They’re also pretty fucked in the head or immature in general. I’m speaking of the adult ones. (I’m generously giving the twenty-somethings a pass)

        Peace out man. See you at tonight’s rally. Subject: “The Corporations” and “How rich countries and individuals oppress the poor”

      3. Yes OM, leftists are just thinking of ways to restrict human productity just for shits and giggles. It has nothing to do with all those scientists whom we humbly defer to in their relevant fields, it’s just a blatant power grab for fun.

        But, but . . . our intentions are good!

        You live in a bizarre fantasy world.

        Just to be clear what side of the multiverse you are coming from, which one of these two is considered a great scientist, John Dee or Isaac Newton in your world?

  13. Too bad it’s not permanent.

    When are the rest of the lying frauds going to step down?

  14. Oh. Whoopsie. How can we survive as a species without such legendary heroes to make up climate data and blackball their skeptics?

    Where have you gone, Phil Jones? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.

    Woo woo woo.

  15. One down, many to go, and back to the drawing board with most of the IPCC’s climate science. Not a bad day.

  16. Professor Jones said: “What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research snake-oil show with as little interruption and diversion as possible. After a good deal of consideration I have decided that the best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the Director’s role during the course of the independent review whitewash and am grateful to the University for agreeing to this. The Review process will have my full support. (and covert direction)”

    Fixed that quote for ya

  17. This is a great difference between British and American culture. When a British politician gets caught, they resign and apologize. When an American politician gets caught, they generally try to bluff their way through.

    -jcr

  18. BTW, one thing that I’ve been wondering about lately is whether it’s worth it to increase the CO2 concentration within a greenhouse to promote plant growth? Will greenhouse tomatoes and basement cannabis benefit from a 1 to 2% CO2 atmosphere?

    -jcr

    1. Yes, they will benefit from increased CO2. They will be harmed far more by floods and draughts. The overall crop yield is predicted to go down for moderate or strong AGW.

      1. Yeah, floods and draughts (?) can be especially deadly inside a fucking greenhouse.

        1. Chad was just making sure to point out that AGW is a bad thing despite the beneficial aspects of CO2 on plants.

    2. You can get carbon dioxide generators specifically for this purpose.

  19. http://www.firstthings.com/blo…..shs-fault/

    …The AGW/Climate Change question became a rigorous boondoggle that got out of control not because the scientist who first suggested a connection between human carbon emission and a change in climate were bad people, or that the question was not worth asking, but because bad people then took the uncertain hypothesis, put it on media-fueled steroids, demonized anyone who disagreed with them, made it political -so much so that even the scientists got caught up in the good/bad, smart/stupid, Gore/Bush, Left/Right identifiers- and found real power there; they allowed the AGW movement to become the dubious centering pole upholding the giant circus tent of their worldviews.

    As such, it is not permitted to be shaken. Shake the centering pole, and everything could come tumbling down: Oh. My. Gawd! If the Gore-doubters were right about this, what else might they be right about? And if they’re all stupid, and I’m smart, but they’re right and I’m wrong . . .

    Implosion.

    If the true-believers of AGW got this wrong, and they’d attached it to all of their politics, all of their hate, all of their superiority, then everything is in a free-fall.

    And this is why the mainstream media cannot possibly report on Climategate until they have an acceptable counter-narrative that they can haul out in order to either debunk the story or soften its edges, even as they break the news. …

  20. They are mad at him because he did not delete all the E-Mails

  21. I love how all you scientists know so much about science, the peer reviewed process, how a scientific consensus grows, etc.

    Look, non-libertarians get it. You guys don’t like government intervention. You guys are afraid of AGW research because if it is correct then there is a strong justification for government intervention of the kind you abhor so fanatically. While some libertarians smartly let science work this thing out and choose to fight the battle by trying to steer us towards solutions which minimize restrictions on human freedom and productivity, some have charged ahead denying processes, findings and data they do not understand due to their utter lack of knowledge of the relevant areas, data, equipment, etc.

    This latter group does not care about the science, they are fanatically opposed to findings of AGW because they fear it will justify things they abhor for political and moral reasons. They have to concoct incredible situations of collective madness, evil conspiratorial cabals, nefarious funding schemes, etc. among the majority of scientists who disagree, because that is the really “inconvenient fact” here, that so many experts disagree with them. So they poo-poo expertise, they suggest conspiracies, cover-ups etc., that would have to exist on an incredibly massive scale to account for the sheer number and widespreadness of those who disagree with them. It’s fantastic.

    1. “”the peer reviewed process,””

      According to the e-mails the peer review process is a combination of shutting down opposing debate and of getting your own papers to people who will rubber stamp them

    2. Degree in Physics, 25 years of experience in engineering building safety critical systems.

      Post your credentials or shut the fuck up.

      1. If you think that trumps 10 post-graduate years in Mom’s basement, you sir have another thing coming.

    3. MNG needs to turn down the bulb on his projector. Fear that breeds blind hatred is the realm of liberals almost exclusively. You reveal so much more about yourself by what you mistakenly believe about libertarians.

      The libertarians I know work REALLY FRIGGING HARD NOT TO LIVE IN FEAR, or to tolerate those who encourage it.

      For more on how AGW’s impact could be lessened WITHOUT your Almighty Governemnt interference (goddamnit, I hate the religious dependence on bureaucratic systems you show in this post!), please go to Bjorn Lomborg’s website (http://www.lomborg.com). He has outlined several viable ways to lessen the impact of AGW (assuming in the face of new evidence to the contrary that it is real) without forcing everyone to bear the yoke of a government solution.

      DAMNIT, I’m still pissed at what a useful idiot you appear to be in this post, MNG! Mao, Pot, and Stalin would have loved this post.

  22. International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
    American Geophysical Union
    European Federation of Geologists
    Geological Society of America
    American Meteorological Society
    Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
    American Quaternary Association
    International Union for Quaternary Research
    American Astronomical Society
    American Chemical Society
    American Statistical Association

    That’s the short list I posted yesterday of professional scientific organizations which, upon reviewing the work on AGW, came to conclusions pretty consistent with the IPCC. These organizations are not usually very political organizations, they are made up of hundreds of scientists. Many work in research centers for the government, but many work for univerisities both public and private and many work in the private sector. They include the major professional organizations for fields as diverse as engineers, statiticians, geologists, astronomers, etc. They come from dozens of nations with a variety of personal political affiliations.

    The problem for deniers is, how to explain this widespread disagreement with themamong such organizations. Collective madness? Socialist cabals? Secret George Soros funding? I mean, what is more incredible, that non-experts with a strong ideological reason to fear and abhor findings of AGW are wrong, or that all of these experts are wrong because of some incredible situation of collective Gaia worship or LeftistPlot?

    1. Man, wake up: it’s the CRU that’s been caught cooking the books, not the “deniers”.

      That said, there is no need for a conspiracy: political correctness is a much more potent silencer. And government money doesn’t hurt.

    2. Re: MNG,

      That’s the short list I posted yesterday of professional scientific organizations which, upon reviewing the work on AGW, came to conclusions pretty consistent with the IPCC.

      Yes, and when it comes to self-delusion, the more, the merrier!

  23. I mean, feel free to look up each organization to check its prestige and essentially non-political nature.

    1. Wait a minute. In light of the scandal at CRU, don’t you think those organizations will have to review, reconsider, and rewrite their positions on AGW? I expect that by this time next year most of those groups will have produced far weaker statements than they currently have, since they relied heavily on CRU for their conclusions.

    2. I mean, the 4th Assessment Report of the IPCC is now useless. Since most of those associations based their statements on climate change on the IPCC report, they will hopefully do the prudent thing and revert to a “we don’t know right now” position.

  24. I’m not seeing enough coverage of the shakedown aspect to this whole thing. I want to see some bank accounts. These guys weren’t clumsy groupthinking do-gooders. They were money grubbing power mongers, just like the politicians that used them.

    1. Actually I think this is clumsy group think of the chicken little variety, add in some petty ego driven human competitive nature and you go long way in explaining this… the bottom line, according the accepted argument from global warming proponents, is yes humans do impact greenhouse gasses CO2, H2O Methane etc etc ad nuaseum, ever since we started clearing brush to plant seeds instead of gathering and keeping animals instead of hunting … are we going to stop… no … But there is vast amounts of evidence that the planet went through significant climate change long before the human race was even a twinkle in some proto-rats eye… so to come out and say the planet is warming and we are CAUSING it when we only have relatively accurate temperature info(and that is currently debatable) for about 100 years give or take the rest based on tree ring and ice core sample that are at best educated GUESSES… I for one don’t buy it. This whole thing has been driven by a lot of well meaning, high profile shallow thinkers who’ve been convinced the world is coming to an end…

  25. When columnists like Eugene Robinson mention possible benefits of AGW in their Copanhagan columns, you know full ass covering mode has begun. I can’t remember ever reading a column that mentioned a longer growing season or a warmer Chicago in the MSM, until now.

  26. MNG, after CRU

    (1) cooked the core data used to support AGW,

    (2) deleted the original datasets,

    (3) refused to release data and models for review, and

    (4) subverted the peer review process to prevent independent review of their papers and block publication of contradictory work,

    I don’t think any statement that relies on CRU work in any way, regardless of who makes it, is worth a damn.

    That is all.

  27. If I’m not mistaken this story, combined with a Jeff Jacoby (who is typically hit-or-miss, but misses the least among Globe editorial staff), brings the total number of pieces in this topic run by the Boston Globe to… 2.

    1. a Jeff Jacoby editorial, that is to say.

  28. Re: MNG,

    Yes OM, leftists are just thinking of ways to restrict human productity just for shits and giggles.

    No, just because they are envious mediocres.

    1. No, just because they are envious mediocre assholes.

      There. Fixed it.

  29. I saw an interview the other week with an underboss at the NIH talking up a report issued claiming health problems associated with global warming. At the tail end of the list, she claimed that global warming causes obesity. That is right, she said global warming causes obesity. See any AGWers denounce crackpot shit coming out of the mouths of bandwagon jumpers?

  30. That is right, [an underboss at the NIH] said global warming causes obesity

    OK, I give up.

    How did she make the connection? Or did she even try?

    I’m dying to know here.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.