jump to navigation

‘Climategate’ university rejects accusations that it manipulated research February 26, 2010

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , ,
trackback

‘Climategate’ university rejects accusations that it manipulated research

The Telegraph, 25 February 2010

The university at the centre of the ”Climategate” row over global warming data today rejected accusations that it had lost or manipulated scientific research.

The University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit has been under fire since hacked emails, which sceptics claimed showed scientists manipulating climate data, were leaked online last year.

In a submission to Parliament’s Science and Technology Committee, which is investigating the disclosure of climate data from the unit, the university said it ”strongly rejected” accusations that it had manipulated or selected figures to exaggerate global warming.

The university also denied suggestions that it had breached Freedom of Information rules by refusing to release raw data.

And it insisted the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) had not lost any primary data gathered from monitoring stations around the world.

According to the submission, allegations that scientists hid flaws and research findings were the result of misunderstandings of technical jargon or statistical analysis.

And it said the often-cited email which refers to a ”trick” to ”hide the decline” in a discussion of temperature measurements had been ”richly misinterpreted and quoted out of context”.

Read the rest here

About these ads

Comments»

1. Charlie A - February 26, 2010

So the article quotes UEA as says “And it insisted the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) had not lost any primary data gathered from monitoring stations around the world.”

This is conflicts with the response by UEA to various FOIA requests. Last summer UEA said “Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e. quality controlled and homogenized) data. ”

ref: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/availability/

Either the quote in the newspaper article is incorrect, or UEA doesn’t consider raw station data to be “primary data”.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 31 other followers

%d bloggers like this: