This morning, the Associated Press released findings after doing a detailed analysis of the emails stolen by hackers that numerous climate change skeptics and right-wingers claimed were evidence that climate change was a hoax perpetuated by scientists.
The AP, which in many cases, hasn't been a friend to progressives, nonetheless revealed in their findings that while in a number of cases, the emails show a lack of professionalism and questionable ethics, there's no evidence that any fraud was committed.
The AP pored over 1,073 emails, totaling about one million words, to get the full context for the emails, instead of just pulling out random phrases or sentences that could be interpreted multiple ways.
The gist of the AP's report is this:
The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.
The scientists were keenly aware of how their work would be viewed and used, and, just like politicians, went to great pains to shape their message. Sometimes, they sounded more like schoolyard taunts than scientific tenets. (emphasis added)
Indeed, some of the emails displayed a pretty ugly tone.
One scientist practically celebrates the news of the death of one critic, saying, "In an odd way this is cheering news!" Another bemoans that the only way to deal with skeptics is "continuing to publish quality work in quality journals (or calling in a Mafia hit.)" And a third scientist said the next time he sees a certain skeptic at a scientific meeting, "I'll be tempted to beat the crap out of him. Very tempted."
And they compared contrarians to communist-baiting Sen. Joseph McCarthy and Somali pirates. They also called them out-and-out frauds.
That these emails were intended to be private is a consideration here, but now that they're out, they reveal a frustration level that lead to some pretty unprofessional behavior that's ultimately hurt the cause far more than it helped.
This behavior manifested itself in more than just schoolyard taunts emailed between colleagues. More seriously, it appears that the scientists may have withheld data from skeptics.
The e-mails show that several mainstream scientists repeatedly suggested keeping their research materials away from opponents who sought it under American and British public records law. It raises a science ethics question because free access to data is important so others can repeat experiments as part of the scientific method. The University of East Anglia is investigating the blocking of information requests.
"I believe none of us should submit to these 'requests,'" declared the university's Keith Briffa in one e-mail. The center's chief, Phil Jones, e-mailed: "Data is covered by all the agreements we sign with people, so I will be hiding behind them."
The primary excuse for such behavior I've heard is that very complex data can be easily manipulated to make it appear as if climate change is debatable.
The road to hell, as they say, is paved with good intentions. The release of this information certainly provides a lot more ammo for climate change deniers than a free release of information that could be explained. Certainly what happened is a more sensational story than two different groups interpreting the same data in different ways.
So obviously the lessons learned here are clear.
But the big news of the day is that no evidence of fraud was found, and so this incident in the end is more about a group of dedicated and frustrated scientists letting their emotions get the best of them, and we've seen the damage that can occur when that happens.