Revision as of 23:29, 18 July 2020 editProcrastinatingReader (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors28,749 editsm Climate change community GS -> DS template (via WP:JWB)← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:43, 1 May 2021 edit undo24.225.161.193 (talk) →The scientific consensus (sic) was changed completelyNext edit → | ||
Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
:Do you have any credible sources whatsoever that confirm your "facts"? Can you please tell us where you're getting this from?] (]) 03:31, 4 June 2017 (UTC) | :Do you have any credible sources whatsoever that confirm your "facts"? Can you please tell us where you're getting this from?] (]) 03:31, 4 June 2017 (UTC) | ||
:: I was not the author of the original statement by 70.195.65.126 above but, I just read it and am returning an answer to your question ]. It is old news but it might lead you to the answer. I think Forbes is not a bad source that could be used for your consideration: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/23/climategate-2-0-new-e-mails-rock-the-global-warming-debate/?sh=509978a227ba | |||
::See this part, in particular: “''Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. ” writes Peter Thorne of the UK Met Office.''] (]) 20:43, 1 May 2021 (UTC) | |||
== External links modified == | == External links modified == |
Revision as of 20:43, 1 May 2021
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Climatic Research Unit email controversy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to climate change, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
A news item involving this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "In the news" column on November 24, 2009. |
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on November 17, 2011, November 17, 2014, November 17, 2018, and November 17, 2019. |
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 3 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
faq page Frequently asked questions
To view an explanation to the answer, click the link to the right of the question. Q1: Why is this article not called "Climategate"? A1: There have been numerous discussions on this subject on the talk page. The current title is not the common name, as is generally used for Misplaced Pages articles, but instead a descriptive title, one chosen to not seem to pass judgment, implicitly or explicitly, on the subject. A recent Requested move discussion has indicated that there is no consensus to move the article to the title of Climategate, and so further discussion of the article title has been tabled until at least June 2011. Q2: Why aren't there links to various emails? A2: The emails themselves are both primary sources and copyright violations. Misplaced Pages avoids using primary sources (WP:PRIMARY), and avoids linking to Copyright violations. If a specific email has been discussed in a reliable, secondary source, use that source, not the email. Q3: Why is/isn't a specific blog being used as a source? A3: Blogs are not typically reliable sources. Blogs may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. Blogs should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer; see WP:BLP#Reliable sources. Q4: Aren't the emails/other documents in the public domain? A4: No. Some of the hacked documents are covered by Crown copyright, others by private copyright. The Freedom of Information Act does not affect copyright. Q5: Why does the article refer to a hacking and to stolen documents? Couldn't this be an accidental release of information or released by a whistleblowing insider ? A5: Misplaced Pages reports the facts from reliable sources. In their most recent statement on the issue, Norfolk Constabulary have said that the information was released through an attack carried out remotely via the Internet and that there is no evidence of anyone associated with the University being associated with the crime. Both the University and a science blog, RealClimate , have reported server hacking incidents directly associated with this affair. The University has stated that the documents were "stolen" and "illegally obtained". Q6: Why is there a biographies of living persons (BLP) notice at the top of this page? This article is about an event, and the Climatic Research Unit is not a living person. A6: The BLP applies to all pages on Misplaced Pages, specifically to all potentially negative statements about living persons. It does not apply solely to articles about living persons. The notice is there to remind us to take care that all statements regarding identifiable living persons mentioned in the article or talk page comply with all Misplaced Pages policies and with the law, per the BLP. Q7: What do I do if I have a complaint about the conduct of other people editing or discussing this article? A7: Follow the dispute resolution policy. It is not optional. Unduly cluttering the talk page with complaints about other editors' behavior is wasteful. In the case of egregiously bad conduct only, consider contacting an administrator. Q8: I think there is inadequate consensus on a matter of policy. What should I do? A8: There are several options. Consider posting the issue on one of the noticeboards, or starting a request for comment (RFC) on the question. Q9: Why doesn't the article report that BBC weather reporter Paul Hudson received an advance copy of the leaked content? A9: Because it isn't true. In fact, the only involvement Paul Hudson reports (see here) is that he had been the subject of emailed complaints from CRU climatologists concerning a blog article he had recently published, and that he was able to confirm that those emailed complaints which had been copied to him by the senders, and which later appeared in the zip file of stolen documents, were authentic. That is to say, Hudson received some of the later leaked e-mails, but only those originally also addressed to him or the BBC, which forwarded them. It appears that some blogs and newspapers have misinterpreted this. This was also confirmed by the BBC on the 27th November 2009 and on the 13th March 2010 when the issue arose again. Q10: Newspapers have reported that this article and a lot of the global warming articles are being controlled and manipulated. Why don't we report that? A10: The items in question are opinion columns by James Delingpole and Lawrence Solomon. Misplaced Pages's guidelines on self-references discourage self-referential material unless publicity regarding a Misplaced Pages article is determined to be significant enough to be included. This requires the Misplaced Pages coverage to be a major part of the controversy. There is no consensus that the two opinion columns meet this criterion. This does not preclude coverage of those writers' opinions on Misplaced Pages in other articles, such as James Delingpole, Lawrence Solomon, Global warming conspiracy theory, and Criticism of Misplaced Pages, but that would be a matter for the editors of those individual articles. On specific charges against an individual named by Lawrence Solomon and repeated uncritically by James Delingpole, please see this discussion on the Conflict of interest noticeboard. |
Archives |
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45 |
/Climategate usage, /emails, /RFC Climategate rename policy query, /RFC/CRU Hacking Dispute, /RFC/Death threats against climate scientists, /RfC on article name change, /Subpage |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Issues related to this article elsewhere on Misplaced Pages
|
The scientific consensus (sic) was changed completely
The emails showed that the current scientific consensus (sic) is that there was a "decline" in the rate of warming despite massive increases in co2 which is easily apparent in the satellite lower troposphere measurements This dramatically changes it and disproved all of their previous models. It also proved that they wanted "hide" this decline which definitively did show misconduct. Editorial claims to the contrary are just claims. Facts are facts — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.195.65.126 (talk) 03:50, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
- Do you have any credible sources whatsoever that confirm your "facts"? Can you please tell us where you're getting this from?Gireen (talk) 03:31, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- I was not the author of the original statement by 70.195.65.126 above but, I just read it and am returning an answer to your question Gireen. It is old news but it might lead you to the answer. I think Forbes is not a bad source that could be used for your consideration: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/23/climategate-2-0-new-e-mails-rock-the-global-warming-debate/?sh=509978a227ba
- See this part, in particular: “Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. ” writes Peter Thorne of the UK Met Office.24.225.161.193 (talk) 20:43, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Climatic Research Unit email controversy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5r1sXRN45?url=http://articles.mcall.com/2010-03-28/news/all-a1_5warming.7216773mar28_1_mails-e-mails-global-warming to http://www.mcall.com/news/local/all-global-warming-penn-state-0328%2C0%2C777593%2Cprint.story
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:21, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Reduce the amount of clutter on this talk page?
Now that it's been 9 years since this happened, and activity on this page is very quiet, perhaps someone could think about reducing the quantity of headers/boxes/warnings on the talk page? --JBL (talk) 11:57, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- I have made an attempt at improvement. --JBL (talk) 12:00, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Qu: Hacking
Was there any proof that this was a hacking I remember reading in the EDP or somewhere that they thought it was a leak. All conjecture but was this every proved or traced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.69.200.4 (talk) 18:41, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
- It's discussed in the references cited in the article. Guettarda (talk) 19:05, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Link/Citation 69 is dead
Well it says it all in the headline — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathcounter (talk • contribs) 17:06, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing that out - I've added an archive url for that citation. Mikenorton (talk) 17:19, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class Weather articles
- Low-importance Weather articles
- Unsorted weather articles
- WikiProject Weather articles
- B-Class Environment articles
- Mid-importance Environment articles
- B-Class Climate change articles
- Mid-importance Climate change articles
- WikiProject Climate change articles
- B-Class Computer Security articles
- Low-importance Computer Security articles
- B-Class Computer Security articles of Low-importance
- B-Class Computing articles
- Low-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- All Computer Security articles
- B-Class Skepticism articles
- Mid-importance Skepticism articles
- WikiProject Skepticism articles
- B-Class Alternative views articles
- Low-importance Alternative views articles
- WikiProject Alternative views articles
- Misplaced Pages In the news articles
- Selected anniversaries (November 2011)
- Selected anniversaries (November 2014)
- Selected anniversaries (November 2018)
- Selected anniversaries (November 2019)
- Pages in the Misplaced Pages Top 25 Report