And the Russian server hosting e-mails cracked from the Climatic Research Unit was…?
[cite as: F. Bi. 2009. And the Russian server hosting e-mails cracked from the Climatic Research Unit was...? Intl. J. Inact., 2:96]
Quirin Schiermeier reports:
[...] The University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) in Norwich confirmed today that e-mails and documents dating from 1991 to 2009 were illegally copied and subsequently published on an anonymous Russian server.
A link to the Russian server first appeared on 19 November on a relatively obscure climate-sceptic blog. The server was shut down just hours later, but the stolen material had already been distributed elsewhere on the Internet.
So I thought to myself, “which Russian server was it, and which obscure blog was it exactly?” After chasing down web links for a while, I landed up on Andrew Bolt’s blog entry [cached] which gave a link to a Russian-sounding web page: http://ftp.tomcity.ru/incoming/free/FOI2009.zip. (The link is broken however, and changing the protocol from http:// to ftp:// gives a “Connection refused” error.) Then again, I’m not sure Bolt’s blog counts as an “obscure” blog, so perhaps Schiermeier was referring to some other web site(s).
Meanwhile, the climate inactivists’ conspiracy-laden interpretations of the e-mails clearly pale in comparison to the things that inactivists have said in public. Greenfyre has more.
Updates
- 2009-11-22: Kevin Grandia issues a challenge to “get to the bottom of this”. And, some things we know initially about the attacker.
- 2009-11-23: There was an initial attempt to upload the
.zipfile torealclimate.org, and it was a crack attempt coming from a machine in Turkey. - 2009-11-27: Timestamps on the individual files in
FOI2009.zipindicate they were archived on a machine under a timezone of -0500 or -0400. - 2009-11-28: The most recent access to the individual files was on 16 Nov.
- 2009-12-04: About the 3 files in
FOI2009.zipthat don’t give timezones of -0500 or -0400. Something odd’s going on with these files. - 2009-12-08: McIntyre and Id say that the attacker’s comments on their blogs came from IP addresses. 82.208.87.170 and 212.116.220.100. And, did a system administrator just save the world?
- 2009-12-25: 13 extra bytes at the end of 5
.docfiles…?
Now for something totally uninteresting
cite as: F. Bi. Now for something totally uninteresting. Intl. J. Inact., 1:96–97
A blog commenter named “Patrick” has charged that my blog is “not interesting”, and that I’ll be ashamed of my own blog in “later years”. Well, Patrick’s comments aren’t particularly interesting themselves; however, I do realize that this in itself is no excuse for my blog to be similarly uninteresting. Indeed I strive, with varying degrees of success, to write about stuff that’s not been written about before, and I hope one day to muster the time and energy to look further into the origins of the ‘greenism is crypto-communism’ meme, a topic which will undoubtedly be full of wholesome fun.
But that’s for another time. Today, I’m going to do something which is absolutely, completely unoriginal. You see, climate change inactivist Anthony Watts has been touting a new piece of punditry by Andrew Bolt, which starts thusly:
PSYCHIATRISTS have detected the first case of “climate change delusion” – and they haven’t even yet got to Kevin Rudd and his global warming guru.
Writing in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, Joshua Wolf and Robert Salo of our Royal Children’s Hospital say this delusion was a “previously unreported phenomenon”.
“A 17-year-old man was referred to the inpatient psychiatric unit at Royal Children’s Hospital Melbourne with an eight-month history of depressed mood . . . He also . . . had visions of apocalyptic events.”
(So have Alarmist of the Year Tim Flannery, Profit of Doom Al Gore and Sir Richard Brazen, but I digress.)
To date there have been 47 comments on Watts’s site, which means it’s hard for me to find something novel to add to the debate (especially since, well, I’m a totally uninteresting person!). So I’ll just repeat… (more…)




7 comments