User:Jpat34721/My Stuff/Proposed Lead
Current Lead
[edit]The Climatic Research Unit hacking incident came to light in November 2009 with the unauthorised release of thousands of e-mails and other documents obtained through the hacking of a server used by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, England. The University of East Anglia described the incident as an illegal taking of data. The police are conducting a criminal investigation of the server breach and subsequent personal threats made against some of the scientists mentioned in the e-mails.
Extracts from the e-mails have been publicised and allegations have been made that they indicate misconduct by leading climate scientists such as withholding scientific information, interfering with the peer-review process of scientific papers, deleting information to prevent disclosure under the United Kingdom's Freedom of Information Act, and selecting data to support the case for global warming. Individuals who oppose action on global warming called the incident "Climategate", which became a commonly used term for the incident. The University of East Anglia and climate scientists have described these interpretations as incorrect and misleading, with the extracts being taken out of context in what has been described as a smear campaign. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change head Rajendra Pachauri are among those who have suggested that the incident was intended to undermine the then imminent December 2009 Copenhagen global climate summit. Though the vast majority of climate data have always been freely available, the incident has prompted general discussion about increasing the openness of scientific data. Scientists, scientific organisations, and government officials have stated that the incident does not affect the overall scientific case for climate change.
The University of East Anglia has announced that an independent review of the allegations will be carried out by Sir Muir Russell and that the CRU's director, Professor Phil Jones, would stand aside from his post during the review.
Proposed Lead
[edit]Climategate is the name commonly used to describe the furor that erupted in November 2009 with the unauthorized release of e-mails and other documents stolen from a computer used by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, England. Published excerpts from the e-mails gave rise to allegations that leading climate scientists withheld scientific information, impeded the publication of opposition papers in the scientific journals, deleted information to prevent disclosure under the United Kingdom's Freedom of Information Act, and selected data to bolster their theories. The University of East Anglia and many climate scientists strongly denied these allegations as misleading and incorrect, and said that the e-mails in their proper context show nothing untoward. The timing of the publication raised concerns that the incident was a smear campaign designed to derail consensus at the December 2009 Copenhagen global climate summit, then just weeks away. While most climate experts expressed the view that nothing in the released documents undermined the science behind the prevailing theory of global warming, some scientists and opinion journalist expressed concerns about the scientific process and transparency practiced at the CRU and other climate centers.
The University of East Anglia said the data was taken illegally and the police conducted a criminal investigation of the server breach as well as subsequent personal threats made against some of the scientists mentioned in the e-mails.
move to appropriate sections
[edit]The University of East Anglia has announced that an independent review of the allegations will be carried out by Sir Muir Russell and that the CRU's director, Professor Phil Jones, would stand aside from his post during the review.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change head Rajendra Pachauri are among those who have suggested that the incident was intended to undermine the then imminent December 2009 Copenhagen global climate summit.