tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post8144739926404808665..comments2024-02-15T04:42:41.606+00:00Comments on James' Empty Blog: ArbitrationJames Annanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04318741813895533700noreply@blogger.comBlogger46125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-72242283763005388492009-11-28T10:09:54.170+00:002009-11-28T10:09:54.170+00:00Ok, James, I've just read your comments in the...Ok, James, I've just read your comments in the other post. I agree that this mail is embarrasing, but, anyway, I don't think this exceptional specific case questions the overall reviewing process.<br /><br />Cheers!Jesús R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08623637876422608968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-68180395573686556942009-11-27T11:34:14.118+00:002009-11-27T11:34:14.118+00:00Oh, there was certainly a "X is reviewing a m...Oh, there was certainly a "X is reviewing a manuscript about Y" statement which should not have been made. Not a hanging offence but a bit embarrassing nevertheless.<br /><br />Regarding EIR/FOIA, I doubt that the people actually knew the precise legal details - in fact it is probably vague to this day, as much of it depends on precedences which have not yet been established - it's always up to the judge...James Annanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04318741813895533700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-38924108905909692832009-11-26T20:35:53.882+00:002009-11-26T20:35:53.882+00:00DavidH,
If "it is the EIR you guys need to w...DavidH,<br /><br />If "it is the EIR you guys need to worry about", why did the e-mails say "FOIA" instead of "EIR"?<br /><br />Thnx.Jesús R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08623637876422608968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-45592390724144713082009-11-26T18:41:44.360+00:002009-11-26T18:41:44.360+00:00Thanks for your answer, James :)
I guess I woudn&...Thanks for your answer, James :)<br /><br />I guess I woudn't go along with the view that "there's a clear breach of confidence about manuscript reviewing" arising from these e-mails. We know from your blog and others' that many scientists are upset with the publication of some substandard papers in the peer reviewed literature. I don't see a big deal in trying to fix that malfunction.<br /><br />Cheers!Jesús R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08623637876422608968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-78617685305969353292009-11-26T04:29:26.184+00:002009-11-26T04:29:26.184+00:00Jesús,
There's a clear breach of confidence a...Jesús,<br /><br />There's a clear breach of confidence about manuscript reviewing, but yes I was mainly thinking that the FOI stuff looks worrying (though it may be legal anyway).James Annanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04318741813895533700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-59700940380036507642009-11-25T21:48:12.208+00:002009-11-25T21:48:12.208+00:00Steve Bloom,
"Environmental Information"...Steve Bloom,<br /><br />"Environmental Information" is excluded from the British Freedom of Information Act 2000 and has to be dealt with under the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 which has fewer absolute exceptions and a presumption of disclosure. <br /><br />It is the EIR you guys need to worry about and the Aarhus convention from which it descends.DavidHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13864840880333704883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-37702710166690374972009-11-25T21:38:19.958+00:002009-11-25T21:38:19.958+00:00I've now gone to the trouble of looking at the...I've now gone to the trouble of looking at the British FOI law, and I don't see a problem for the CRU folks. Confidential communications (defined by whether the sender thinks it's confidential) have an "absolute" exemption from disclosure. Given that the UEA FOI officer was discussing the matter with Phil and others prior to the deletions, that they were legal should come as no particular surpise. <br /><br />I should state that while I'm not a subject matter expert, these days I write environmental legislation for a living.Steve Bloomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12943109973917998380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-12554572198059363962009-11-25T19:50:45.660+00:002009-11-25T19:50:45.660+00:00James, in this blog post you say:
"A handful...James, in this blog post you say:<br /><br />"A handful of messages hint at something a bit worse, [...]"<br /><br />What are you thinking of? The FOIA request? It's the only thing I can think of, though I don't know much about the UK regulations.<br /><br />Thanks!Jesús R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08623637876422608968noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-78464363979067387162009-11-25T17:56:40.822+00:002009-11-25T17:56:40.822+00:00"That was a joke, right?"
Yes and no.
..."That was a joke, right?"<br /><br />Yes and no. <br /><br />Some people seem to want to conflate IPCC report writing with public money. I knew the answer, but thought it might sound better coming from you.<br /><br />Though as you're a climate scientist, they probably don't believe you. ;)skankyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14584908320777937193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-87820836705671384782009-11-25T02:36:51.145+00:002009-11-25T02:36:51.145+00:00"How much do authors of IPCC chapters get pai..."How much do authors of IPCC chapters get paid for their work?"<br /><br />That was a joke, right?<br /><br />Authors get precisely a big fat nothing. I am sure they do, on the whole, get some support from their current employers, at a minimum being allowed to use their existing facilities at work such as email, PC and library. I guess they would mostly get cut a bit of slack for what costs in terms of their existing duties and outputs, but for the most part it is just an additional and unpaid (but prestigious) task on top of everything else they are supposed to be doing. Several have been heard to say "never again", especially during the public comment phase when they are obliged to read and respond to absolutely everything that is submitted :-)<br /><br />Oh, at the end of it they get a free copy of the book. But I got that for just supplying a little bit of data :-)James Annanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04318741813895533700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-40874665230931625322009-11-24T23:58:44.812+00:002009-11-24T23:58:44.812+00:00"I haven't managed to get very interested..."I haven't managed to get very interested in the various hockey wars. My vague understanding is that the proxy should not have been used, but that it doesn't make any real difference."<br /><br />GS gives a reasonable sounding explanation on RC (context thread, IIRC). Not that bothered about that stuff myself, either, so can't immediately find them again. <br /><br />Anyway, the fact that there are two different papers, that used very different methods suggests that one mea-culpa is not so damning of the other study. <br /><br />I'm sure those who raise the issue in their usual mock horror have already seen the comment replies, and wouldn't be persuaded anyway, but other vaguely interested may want to find them.skankyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14584908320777937193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-62647744246120277752009-11-24T23:48:10.966+00:002009-11-24T23:48:10.966+00:00How much do authors of IPCC chapters get paid for ...How much do authors of IPCC chapters get paid for their work?skankyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14584908320777937193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-83816573647097056302009-11-24T23:20:25.891+00:002009-11-24T23:20:25.891+00:00Viento,
The IPCC has some rules about access to i...Viento,<br /><br />The IPCC has some rules about access to its workings. As you may recall, I've been <a href="http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2007/05/no-comments.html" rel="nofollow">scathing enough</a> of how they originally interpreted part of that policy, but they eventually fixed the problem. However, this does not cover the vast majority of the released emails, including all the ones relating to me, for example. <br /><br />Tom,<br /><br />I haven't managed to get very interested in the various hockey wars. My vague understanding is that the proxy should not have been used, but that it doesn't make any real difference.<br /><br />Yes DC, my latest post was partly precipitated by your prompting, although I've also heard widespread concerns from multiple sources.James Annanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04318741813895533700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-87444748770848394722009-11-24T19:06:55.240+00:002009-11-24T19:06:55.240+00:00Among other things, Monbiot has totally missed tha...Among other things, Monbiot has totally missed that the emails that supposedly show efforts to suppress "skeptic science", are really a discussion of what to do about the skeptic "gaming" of the peer-review system.<br /><br />It turned out it was worse than they thought. And it's still going on. See James's latest:<br /><br />http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2009/11/advice-to-agu-regading-their-journals.html<br /><br />I'd like to think my comment above reminded James that he should take action on this issue. I'm glad someone is.Deep Climatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07739846320319167391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-77618744273062584852009-11-24T16:58:19.573+00:002009-11-24T16:58:19.573+00:00'UEA staff are not "public employees"...'UEA staff are not "public employees", the UN has nothing to do with it, they are UK employees and the ECHR gives a clear expectation of privacy even while at work.'<br /><br />They were preparing drafts of one chapter of the IPCC Report, and one lead author warns them explicitly that the emails may eventually have to be made public. So, they knew.<br /><br />All personal information had been previously stripped off. There are no references to wives, lovers, private money or the like whatsoever. This is very different from sneaking into my PC, not that there would be much about lovers anyway..<br /><br />Nixon also argued they were his private tapes.eduardohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17725131974182980651noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-40257779478265230262009-11-24T15:09:45.685+00:002009-11-24T15:09:45.685+00:00I have to agree - it all sounds more Karl Rove tha...I have to agree - it all sounds more Karl Rove than Carl Sagan. It's definitely a "say it ain't so Joe" moment. I think Hans von Storch has it about right. <br /><br />It's a shame the reich-wingers in the US have so much more ammunition now (the Inhofe's & Issa's et al are smacking their lips and writing subpoena's up as we speak -- and it's ain't for capturing the UEA hacker).Carl Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14717209873111026574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-21512209643683185652009-11-24T15:01:02.529+00:002009-11-24T15:01:02.529+00:00The legal issues here are pretty thorny, but the e...The legal issues here are pretty thorny, but the expectation of the partisans here - that their champions will be unscathed - is a little optimistic. Martin, your "accessory to a crime" theory is laughable. And you think I am paranoid.<br /><br />The Mann E-mail that I posted does not portray a scientist who wants to get things right. It portrays a cynical politician orchestrating a smear campaign. Most people have no problem grasping this.<br /><br />One of the more interesting E-mails, in context of recent blog wars, is from Kaufmann's coathor,in which he admits that the Finnish lake sediment series was used upside down. He outlines steps taken to correct the matter.<br /><br />But your colleague Stoat poured forth as many words as are in War and Peace trying to obfuscate this problem, which anyone with common sense, let alone scientific training can grasp. Mann replied in the peer-reviewed literature (everyone prostrate themselves) that the claim was "bizarre". <br /><br />So, how about you, Annan the Great, can you bring yourself to admit that Mann is wrong? Or would the political fallout be too damaging? I'm sure the smear campaign against Von Storch is gearing up.Tom Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03793192912187740419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-27878437951179681422009-11-24T14:35:48.594+00:002009-11-24T14:35:48.594+00:00UEA staff are not "public employees", th...UEA staff are not "public employees", the UN has nothing to do with it, they are UK employees and the ECHR gives a clear expectation of privacy even while at work.<br /><br />But irrespective of legal details, reading private email without permission is certainly ethically worse than the vast majority of the contents that I've seen. If you found someone searching through your emails on your PC at work, how would you react?<br /><br />As for Monbiot: journalist in overexcited journalist writes hyperbole shocker. Colour me unsurprised. He'll have got bored with this and will be writing another chip wrapper next week.James Annanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04318741813895533700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-91205814462562127982009-11-24T14:05:46.255+00:002009-11-24T14:05:46.255+00:00"Whether or not this is private information i..."Whether or not this is private information is, at the very least, debatable, and possibly lawyers will have have to clarify this question. There is not personal information here. They reflect their activities as public employees, funded by public money"<br /><br />The emails are the property of the University - so permission should be obtained from the university before being published. Some emails in that file will be privately owned, or owned by other institutions (eg JA's, MM's etc. emails).<br /><br />They are not public employees. <br /><br />Their work is part funded by public money (I don't know the full breakdown), but then so is anybody's who do work for governments, councils, etc.<br /><br />The FOI request was turned down by the compliance officer at the university, appealed against, and the rejection upheld. The letter is on CA (and re-posted on RC), so I'm sure people have seen it.<br /><br />It is very likely that no emails were deleted (maybe locally, but so what?), as the university will have copies of all its email traffic. Without knowing what their email system is, it's hard to know what form it's stored in.<br /><br />The fact that the emails are .txt files suggests either an Exchange server or a different store from which the emails were exported. Either way, there's no evidence of the university destroying any emails - especially as these go back ten years or so.skankyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14584908320777937193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-85099168625436803442009-11-24T12:56:44.040+00:002009-11-24T12:56:44.040+00:00Monbiot:
This does not change the science but Phil...Monbiot:<br />This does not change the science but Phil Jones should resign<br /><br />http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2009/nov/23/global-warming-leaked-email-climate-scientists?showallcomments=true#CommentKey:ec106fea-3008-4b59-ba57-dbc1aaddeff4eduardohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17725131974182980651noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-52070958465900474332009-11-24T11:47:02.127+00:002009-11-24T11:47:02.127+00:00Whether or not this is private information is, at ...Whether or not this is private information is, at the very least, debatable, and possibly lawyers will have have to clarify this question. There is not personal information here. They reflect their activities as public employees, funded by public money and commissioned by the UN. This information had been required to be disclosed under FOI and, it seems, possibly illegally withhold.<br />One person involved even warns the others the that the emails had to be formulated as if they would be eventually going to be made public. <br />All these are legal matters, which we possibly are not in position to judge. It is, strange, at the very least, that you do not seem worried about the damage to the peer-review system and the credibility of science that this information containseduardohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17725131974182980651noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-15661134047101413482009-11-24T07:17:41.660+00:002009-11-24T07:17:41.660+00:00By the way, AGU is searchibg for editors for both ...By the way, AGU is searchibg for editors for both GRL and JGR-Oceans.<br /><br />http://www.agu.org/pubs/editors/search/Deep Climatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07739846320319167391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-52369112424834202252009-11-24T06:36:47.981+00:002009-11-24T06:36:47.981+00:00DC,
Well there have been some clunkers in GRL too...DC,<br /><br />Well there have been some clunkers in GRL too...what's worse the editors seem openly hostile to fielding comments there (not just my experience).<br /><br />Martin,<br /><br />I've certainly no intention of piling onto HvS, who I respect greatly. I think he's certainly entitled to his opinions and statements (Paul: see the link in my previous comment if you haven't already), but am not convinced by his tentative suggestion, still less Tom's exaggeration of it.James Annanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04318741813895533700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-75048520794634177652009-11-24T06:05:21.689+00:002009-11-24T06:05:21.689+00:00There's a serious problem with GRL and it shou...<i><br />There's a serious problem with GRL and it should be discussed openly. The AGU needs to step up and acknowledge the problem and do something about it.</i><br /><br />Oops, I meant <b>JGR</b> of course, i.e. Journal of Geophysical Research (Atmospheres). Sigh ... sorry about that.Deep Climatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07739846320319167391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9959776.post-30173020932210121952009-11-24T03:24:27.627+00:002009-11-24T03:24:27.627+00:00James:
It is interesting to note HvS does not exp...James:<br /><i><br />It is interesting to note HvS does not express any qualms about reading through the private emails of others. If IPCC authors were required to allow full access to the past 10+ years of their files then there I think would not be many candidates, at least not credible ones. Maybe that would suit you just fine.<br /></i><br /><br />That would suit many people just fine, and may be the most serious fall-out of this.<br /><br />About Von Storch, yes it is disappointing that he would react this way, especially compared to his exemplary conduct in the S&B spat... he has every reason to be envious at the h-indices of Mann and Jones ;-) but not wanting the IPCC to be populated by the top workers in the field is just irresponsible.Martin Vermeerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04537045395760606324noreply@blogger.com