Stolen CRU emails: Who are the criminals behind the conspiracy theorists?

Former Republican strategist Marc Morano is having as much fun with the stolen emails from the Climate Research Unit that he did with the Swift Boat Veteran’s for Truth attack he led against John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election.

Morano and his site Climate Depot has become the climate conspiracy hub since this story broke on late Thursday.

This cabal of climate deniers seems to think that 12 year-old emails between climate scientists somehow refutes the thousands of research papers produced over decades by thousands of researchers at some of the best scientific institutions in the world.

While Morano is the master of right-wing spin and is using these emails for his political agenda, the bigger question here is:

Who stole all this private data from the University in the first place?

The folder of information contains over 3,800 separate files and it is clear that someone has taken a lot of time to pull together what they thought would be the most damaging. This is not the work of a hacker, unless that hacker is extremely well-versed in climate science, and specifically the conspiracy theories of the climate denial movement.

This package of stolen data and emails would have taken hundreds of hours to compile and someone out there knows exactly how all this went down.

Terry Hurlbut at the Examiner has a time line of the stolen data going public which is a good start. I am sure one of our intrepid readers will get to the bottom of this. Tell you what. I’ll race you.


I’d say Ball knows more about libel lawsuits than climate science.

Did you read the last line in the article? Desmog quarterbacked the legal team with resources. The question arises, how much money is desmog getting from big enviro to crush individual people like Tim Ball who have few resources? Who is the big money behind Desmog? Anyone know?

Did you read the rest of the article? Ball initiated the lawsuit. Sane people do not initiate lawsuits unless they have enough money to pay for their lawyers.

The issue is honest discussion for the survival, or at least quality of life for everyone on this planet. In this instance, it is wrong to make the data a commodity. Morally standing behind the financial argument of nondisclosure for financial reasons, puts them in the same category as those who do not want to stop polluting. Whenever you have to follow the money, someone wants to control the discussion. If the true desire is contributing to the greater good, all involved should be forthcoming with any information needed to PROVE the issue one way or another.

When someone controls the information for ANY financial reason, their motive is suspect. Transparency is one way to eliminate that. Whatever the context, or thinking was in these emails, it is clear the process can’t be defended on the altruistic grounds of human survival. They left the tracks a long time ago when the research was coveted for profit. What should have been co-operation has become competition. That has now cast a pall over the efforts of those involved. If scientists are lying for political, or economic reasons we all lose. As a regular person I am left with the thought that the quest was not for truth, but control. If control is the motivation, my guess in this context is that it is not merely for greater professional praises.

The issue we have before us is to rethink our lifestyle, and how it contributes to the decline of the planet who’s stewardship is in our hands. Looking at the volume of depression and anxiety in America that goes with our culture tells us we are headed in the wrong direction. So let’s stop having a giant pissing contest like bullies in a schoolyard. Whatever their motivation these scientists to be accountable. The issue is just too damned important.

Let’s hope it leads to as many of the best and brightest we can get, analyzing the issue. If warming is occurring let’s deal with it. If it is not, let’s use the discussion as a springboard to rethink what’s important to us. This is not a freakin political rally boys and girls. It needs to be part of the discussion that leads us to a more progressive social evolution.