Comments on: The University of East Anglia CRU comes clean: there WAS a medieval warm period

By: Ted Davison

Ted Davison — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 13:49:54 +0000

Acton’s actual words, as reported in the HoC ‘Uncorrected Evidence’, were:
‘It is in a way the most deeply confirmed and affirmed, the major issue of a temperature graph from about 1850. The early medieval period – we should be spending more money on the research, but the latter is so overly endorsed by scientists I am puzzled that we should welcome a savouring of doubt where scientists say “but there is no doubt”.’
[http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/uc387-i/uc38702.htm]
This rambling utterance conveys nothing to me. It will be interesting to see whether Acton offers any ‘correction’.

By: Graham

Graham — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 20:11:36 +0000

Oooops – it wasn’t the Harrabin interview sorry.

It was reported to have been said by Acton, Jones’ Vice Chancellor, as they sat, side by side, at the UK Government inquiry.

Finally, after all this time we start hearing the truth out of a government inquiry.

“Next to him, holding a metaphorical hand, was Professor Edward Acton, his vice-chancellor, who interrupted at intervals to tell the committee what a splendid fellow Jones was and how his unit was doing magnificent work warning the world.

Acton conceded that not everything pointed in the same direction. It’s acknowledged that several hundred years ago Earth became much warmer. If we knew why, we could explain a lot. “The early medieval period is something we should spend more time researching,” he mused.”

By: Graham

Graham — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 20:01:31 +0000

Try here Ted

http://www.climategate.com/the-full-bbc-qa-of-phil-jones

By: Ted Davison

Ted Davison — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 19:26:35 +0000

Whilst it is abundantly clear that Acton, like Jones and others, is struggling to defend the indefensible, I can’t find in the ‘Uncorrected Minutes’ the quote:
‘The early medieval period is something we should spend more time researching’
attributed to him.
Can anyone help?

By: Eye on Britain (2)

Eye on Britain (2) — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 13:27:23 +0000

[...] SOURCE [...]

By: Tuukka Simonen

Tuukka Simonen — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 07:27:49 +0000

Selected publications by Dr. Acton:

* Alexander Herzen and the Role of the Intellectual Revolutionary (1979)
* Rethinking the Russian Revolution (1990)
* Russia: the Tsarist and Soviet Legacy (1995)
* Critical Companion to the Russian Revolution 1914-21 (co-ed, 1997)
* The Soviet Union: A Documentary History (2 vols, 2005, 2007)

He doesn’t have ANYTHING to do with climate science. He is NOT an authority in this issue. Your conclusions are so full of s**t it hurts to even read your mumbo jumbo.

By: Jack

Jack — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 23:50:20 +0000

John,
You’re right I was soft on Phil Jones — thanks for reminding me of those emails.

By: Dave McK

Dave McK — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 12:09:30 +0000

You have Gavin pegged. Despicable, loathsome creature.

Don’t forget Jones wished for a disaster ‘to prove the science’, too.
They call it post normal, formerly known as abnormal.

By: John Smith

John Smith — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 07:35:34 +0000

Jack I agree totally regarding Mann and that A**hole Gavin. In fact Gavin is by far the worst. He’s the Goebels of the group. But any time you feel sorry for Jones just remeber these lines…
(paraphrase)
‘Even if I have to redefine what the Peer Review litariture is….’

and regarding the death of a great Australian researcher..

‘Oddly, this is cheering news….’

I hope he dies! In pain and I am enjoying watching him grow old before my eyes!

By: Jack

Jack — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 03:00:34 +0000

I’m a sceptic but I do have a soft spot for Dr. Jones. He’s letting out the truth a snippet at a time, unlike the arrogant Mann and that Gavin A**hole. I want to see Congress grill Mann and Gavin until they cry like little girls — dreams do come true.