Scientists Reply to "Climategate"
| Marilyn Sigman, Alaska SeaGrant/MAP
Tags: Climate Change, Communicating about Climate Change, Communicating Science, Global Climate Change
Science untarnished by 'Climategate,' U.N. says
by Reuters 11/26/09
The head of the U.N.'s panel of climate experts rejected accusations of bias on Thursday, saying a "Climategate" row in no way undermined evidence that humans are to blame for global warming.
Climate change skeptics have seized on a series of emails written by specialists in the field, accusing them of colluding to suppress data which might have undermined their arguments.
The e-mails, some written as long as 13 years ago, were stolen from a British university by unknown hackers and spread rapidly across the Internet.
But Rajendra Pachauri, who chairs the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), stood by his panel's 2007 findings, called the Fourth Assessment Report (AR4). "This private communication in no way damages the credibility of the AR4 findings," he told Reuters in an e-mail exchange.
This report helped to underpin a global climate response which included this week carbon emissions targets proposed by the United States and China, and won the IPCC a share of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.
Global warming: What the science tells us
Washington Post 12/11/09
Thomas R. Karl, director of the National Climatic Data Center at NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) returned from Copenhagen was online Friday, Dec. 11, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the scientific aspects of climate change with Washington Post readers.
In the Face of Skeptics, Experts Affirm Climate Peril
By ANDREW C. REVKIN and JOHN M. BRODER
NY Times 12/6/09
Climategate: Anatomy of a Public Relations Disaster
BY FRED PEARCE
e360yale.edu Blog 12/10/09
The way that climate scientists have handled the fallout from the leaking of hacked e-mails is a case study in how not to respond to a crisis. But it also points to the need for climate researchers to operate with greater transparency and to provide more open access to data.
Lots of people believe in UFOs. It doesn’t make them right. Lots of people don’t believe in man-made climate change. It doesn’t make them right either.
The media blizzard that has descended on climate science since the hacking of hundreds of e-mails held on the webmail server at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, is set to become a case study — in public relations disasters, in the folly of incontinent electronic communication, in the shortcomings of peer review, and, very probably, in “how not to save the world.”