Over and out
The anonymous leaker responsible for
'Climategate' and 'Climategate 2.0' has released an email which many believe
will spark 'Climategate 3.0'
An anonymous leaker known as 'Mr. FOIA',
who was responsible for bringing the 'Climategate' and 'Climategate 2.0' emails
into the public domain, yesterday (March 12th) returned to release a new email
to a number of high-profile climate skeptic bloggers.
The
newly circulated email is said to contain a password to a cache of
thousands of emails and makes the following request:
"To
get the remaining scientifically (or otherwise) relevant emails out, I
ask you to pass this on to any motivated and responsible individuals who could
volunteer some time to sift through the material for eventual release."
The
original 'Climategate' affair began in 2009 with the hacking of
a server at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University
of East Anglia (UEA) and the release of thousands of emails and
computer files.
The
contents of the newest batch of emails is, as yet, unknown.
THE EMAIL AS REPORTED BY WATTSUPWITHTHAT
===========================================================
Subject:
FOIA 2013: the password
It’s
time to tie up loose ends and dispel some of the speculation surrounding the
Climategate affair.
Indeed,
it’s singular “I” this time. After certain career developments I can no
longer use the papal plural ;-)
If
this email seems slightly disjointed it’s probably my linguistic background and
the problem of trying to address both the wider audience (I expect this will be
partially reproduced sooner or later) and the email recipients (whom I haven’t
decided yet on).
DO
NOT PUBLISH THE PASSWORD. Quote other parts if you like.
Releasing
the encrypted archive was a mere practicality. I didn’t want to keep the
emails lying around.
I
prepared CG1 & 2 alone. Even skimming through all 220.000 emails
would have taken several more months of work in an increasingly unfavorable
environment.
Dumping
them all into the public domain would be the last resort. Majority of the
emails are irrelevant, some of them probably sensitive and socially damaging.
To
get the remaining scientifically (or otherwise) relevant emails out, I
ask you to pass this on to any motivated and responsible individuals who could
volunteer some time to sift through the material for eventual release.
Filtering\redacting
personally sensitive emails doesn’t require special expertise.
I’m
not entirely comfortable sending the password around unsolicited, but haven’t
got better ideas at the moment. If you feel this makes you seemingly
“complicit” in a way you don’t like, don’t take action.
I
don’t expect these remaining emails to hold big surprises. Yet it’s
possible that the most important pieces are among them. Nobody on the
planet has held the archive in plaintext since CG2.
That’s
right; no conspiracy, no paid hackers, no Big Oil. The Republicans didn’t
plot this. USA politics is alien to me, neither am I from the UK.
There is life outside the Anglo-American sphere.
If
someone is still wondering why anyone would take these risks, or sees only a
breach of privacy here, a few words…
The
first glimpses I got behind the scenes did little to garner my trust in
the state of climate science — on the contrary. I found myself in front
of a choice that just might have a global impact.
Briefly
put, when I had to balance the interests of my own safety, privacy\career of a
few scientists, and the well-being of billions of people living in the coming
several decades, the first two weren’t the decisive concern.
It
was me or nobody, now or never. Combination of several rather improbable
prerequisites just wouldn’t occur again for anyone else in the foreseeable
future. The circus was about to arrive in Copenhagen. Later on it
could be too late.
Most
would agree that climate science has already directed where humanity puts its
capability, innovation, mental and material “might”. The scale will grow
ever grander in the coming decades if things go according to script.
We’re dealing with $trillions and potentially drastic influence on practically
everyone.
Wealth
of the surrounding society tends to draw the major brushstrokes of a newborn’s
future life. It makes a huge difference whether humanity uses its assets
to achieve progress, or whether it strives to stop and reverse it, essentially sacrificing
the less fortunate to the climate gods.
We
can’t pour trillions in this massive hole-digging-and-filling-up endeavor and
pretend it’s not away from something and someone else.
If
the economy of a region, a country, a city, etc. deteriorates, what
happens among the poorest? Does that usually improve their prospects? No, they
will take the hardest hit. No amount of magical climate thinking can turn
this one upside-down.
It’s
easy for many of us in the western world to accept a tiny green inconvenience
and then wallow in that righteous feeling, surrounded by our “clean” technology
and energy that is only slightly more expensive if adequately subsidized.
Those
millions and billions already struggling with malnutrition, sickness, violence,
illiteracy, etc. don’t have that luxury. The price of “climate
protection” with its cumulative and collateral effects is bound to destroy and
debilitate in great numbers, for decades and generations.
Conversely,
a “game-changer” could have a beneficial effect encompassing a similar scope.
If I
had a chance to accomplish even a fraction of that, I’d have to try. I
couldn’t morally afford inaction. Even if I risked everything, would
never get personal compensation, and could probably never talk about it with
anyone.
I
took what I deemed the most defensible course of action, and would do it again
(although with slight alterations — trying to publish something truthful on
RealClimate was clearly too grandiose of a plan ;-).
Even
if I have it all wrong and these scientists had some good reason to mislead us
(instead of making a strong case with real data) I think disseminating the
truth is still the safest bet by far.
Big
thanks to Steve and Anthony and many others. My contribution would never
have happened without your work (whether or not you agree with the views
stated).
Oh,
one more thing. I was surprised to learn from a “progressive” blog,
corroborated by a renowned “scientist”, that the releases were part of a
coordinated campaign receiving vast amounts of secret funding from shady energy
industry groups.
I
wasn’t aware of the arrangement but warmly welcome their decision to support my
project. For that end I opened a bitcoin address: 1HHQ36qbsgGZWLPmiUjYHxQUPJ6EQXVJFS.
More
seriously speaking, I accept, with gratitude, modest donations to support The
(other) Cause. The address can also serve as a digital signature to ward
off those identity thefts which are part of climate scientists’ repertoire of
tricks these days.
Keep
on the good work. I won’t be able to use this email address for long so
if you reply, I can’t guarantee reading or answering. I will send several
batches, to anyone I can think of.
Over and out.
Mr. FOIA
No comments:
Post a Comment