Coby Beck, author of How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic (PJM’s fisking of his work here):

I hear the conspiritorial cat is well out of CRU’s bag and the jig is up on the Global Warming hoax. I guess the Greenland ice sheet will be well refrozen by now, and the sea levels have stopped rising. Oh well, it was fun scaring you all while it lasted!


Chris Mooney, author of The Republican War on Science. (Yes, really.):

Why “ClimateGate” Ain’t Nothing

Global warming deniers are having a field day, because in some of the emails, the scientists are acting like, you know, people. They are also acting like scientists under fire, which is what they were and are. The Climate Research Unit is headed by Phil Jones, who has been involved in the highly public and seemingly unending “hockey stick” battle — and so peering into the emails lets the skeptics and deniers once again claim there was some kind of bad science involved in this one particular study, a claim they’ve been making for almost a decade now. Of course, none of this is at all relevant to the climate issue today. It’s a nasty, ugly sideshow. The science of climate change doesn’t stand or fall based upon what a few scientists said in emails they always thought would remain private. …

The fact is that no matter what a few scientists may have said in emails, we have to go to Copenhagen and deal with our warming, melting planet. That’s what matters. The rest of this is hot air, and — unless it can somehow be channeled to power a few wind turbines — it doesn’t do us or the planet any good.

How are these hacked emails helping my children?


First: Watergate was named “gate” for a reason. Every other “gate” is just a silly name.

Second: The only emails I’ve read, I’ve read involuntarily as they’ve been posted to Wikipedia. I don’t think it’s right reading the email of others.

Third: I assume the “worst” emails are the ones they’re trying to push.

Fourth: From what I’ve read, this seems much ado about nothing.

I haven’t kept up with the climate blogs/news recently, so maybe my assessment is wrong. But it seems like the email conversations you’d expect scientists to have.

My two cents.

“Delete the emails!” is not the email conversation I would expect scientists to have. Scientologists, maybe. Or James Carville.

———————- (“This blog explores the topic of the psychology of climate change denial … “):

The theft of 1,000 private e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (UEA) shows that deniers have learned lessons from dirty politics and are running a new campaign to undermine public trust in climate scientists. …

The denial industry (and hordes of climate nerds) has trawled through these e-mails and found sentences which, when removed from context, support their storyline that climate science is being deliberately distorted and exaggerated for a mixed bag of self interested and politicized ends.

Even better for them, some of these quotations come from Michael Mann.

But you could find anything in here. I looked and found lots of references to lunch and fun, 94 to hate, 31 to love.

You may deny our science, but you cannot deny our references to love.