Climate Audit Used for East Anglia Course

Maurizio (h/t Bishop Hill) spotted an email (2639 in 2009) describing extensive use of Climate Audit in a non-CRU East Anglia course:

Neil Adger has taken over the running of First Year course here in ENV. He asked Alan Kendall for the ppt for 2 lectures he gives. He sent them and 40 slides are taken from Climate Audit! A student asked Neil why Alan was saying things opposite to what Neil and Tim Osborn were saying!!!

Alan is retiring at the end of this year….thankfully.


  1. Bruce
    Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 4:59 PM | Permalink

    “I did send one of the requests to Myles as it was from one of his fellow profs in Physics at Oxford! Myles knows him well and he has never talked about climate with Myles – or expressed any views. Myles can’t understand why he’s getting his climate education from Climate Audit and not from colleagues in his own dept!”

    I can understand …

  2. JonasM
    Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 5:06 PM | Permalink

    I found this on Bishop Hill: Interview with Alan Kendall

  3. Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 5:11 PM | Permalink

    Bruce, the “fellow Prof in Physics at Oxford” would be me. I actually started my climate education at RealClimate, but I switched over here once it became clear that the science content was of higher quality.

    • Steve McIntyre
      Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 5:26 PM | Permalink

      It’s amazing how they disregard confidentiality of emails from others, while insisting on confidentiality of their own.

      • Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 7:00 PM | Permalink

        Indeed……txt 5250 …..all of this must be some trip down memory lane for you….. I know it is for a lot of us….at any rate, I didn’t know if you’ve seen this or not.

        date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:18:38 +0100
        from: Olive Heffernan <heffernan.olive@xxxxx
        subject: Re: Piece for CRU web site
        to: "" <P.Jones@xxxxxx

        Hi Phil,

        Ok, thanks for clarifying that. When will the url to the agreements go online?


        On 09/08/2009, <P.Jones@xxxxx wrote:
        I did send some of the data to a person working
        with Peter Webster at Georgia Tech. The email wasn't to
        PW, but he was in the CC list. I don't know how
        McIntyre found out, but I thought this was a personal
        email. This was one of the first times I'd sent
        some data to a fellow scientist who wasn't at the
        Hadley Centre. As I said I have taken pity on African
        and Asian PhD students who wanted some temperature and precipitation
        data for their country. The email has only gotten me grief,
        so this is another reason for being much less helpful to
        people emailing CRU. This goes against my nature, but
        I've been driven to it. You'd better not say this, otherwise
        McIntyre will request the emails where to prove I've been

        I should have just said to the GA person – use GHCN, like I do to
        everyone else.

        I also don't see why I should help people, I don't want to work
        with and who spend most of their time critisising me.

        Years ago I did send much paleo data to McIntyre but have also
        had nothing but criticism on his blog ever since. As I said,
        this criticism on blog sites is not the way to do science.
        If they want to engage, they have to converse in civil tones,
        and if people don't want to work with them, they have to respect
        that and live with it.


        Hi Phil,

        Thanks so much for that. I have one other question: McIntyre claims
        that you sent data to Peter Webstre at Georgia Tech, but that you
        would not supply him with the same data. Is that true, and if so, what
        was the reasoning?


        On 07/08/2009, Phil Jones <p.jones@xxxxx wrote:
        Here it is. There will be a link to the agreements – which are
        Files won't go up with these names. You should recognize one of these
        – the data agreement between the Met Office and NERC.

        Met Services appear want to be able to sell data commercially.
        As I said some has more value than other types of data. Most
        put in clauses separating academic from commercial use.



      • Craig Loehle
        Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 8:50 PM | Permalink

        Indeed, they are also quick to share with each other which papers they have reviewed, in spite of that being supposedly confidential info.

        • ianl8888
          Posted Nov 24, 2011 at 1:35 AM | Permalink

          This situation is simply ho-hum, Craig

          Most people don’t at all mind being hypocritical, they just mind it being pointed out

  4. DGH
    Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 5:40 PM | Permalink

    Kendall’s words in 4341 are quite interesting…

    “Also please don’t you presume to lecture me about what particular website I should or should not be consulting. I’ll make my own mind up. In actual fact , I read both ClimateAudit and RealClimate.”

    Read the whole thing.

  5. Bob Moss
    Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 5:51 PM | Permalink

    Dr. Kendall is still listed under faculty on the UEA website:

    • Charlie A
      Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 8:51 PM | Permalink

      Does he have access to the CRU mail server ?

      Just joking, of course.

      • Bob Moss
        Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 9:52 PM | Permalink

        of course

        • Alberto
          Posted Nov 24, 2011 at 4:33 AM | Permalink

          When reading his biography, I noticed some interesting things: oil industry, university of Toronto etc. 🙂

  6. Paul Matthews
    Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 6:02 PM | Permalink

    In 1788.txt, a journalist from ITV asks PJ if there is anyone to counter the view of David Viner (the guy who said “children aren’t going to know what snow is”). PJ declares that there’s nobody at UEA who dissents from the doctrine. OK, that was 2004, but presumably Alan Kendall was there then, not to mention Paul Dennis.

  7. Dave
    Posted Nov 23, 2011 at 6:43 PM | Permalink

    Later Tim Osborn was discussing Alan Kendall with Mick Kelly:

    Mick Kelly wrote:
    “That’s amazing re Alan Kendall (always thought he was rather a loose
    cannon)… I’d call his bluff and constructively suggest that he might ensure consistency between what you say (assuming you give the lectures I used to cover?) and his account – for the students’ sake at least! Alternatively, could always threaten to have Greenpeace invade his lecture Good luck! Kind of ironic that I used to invoke academic freedom when criticised by ENV for ‘promoting’ concern about global warming and I suspect Alan might respond in a similar fashion.”

  8. ralph hayburn
    Posted Nov 24, 2011 at 5:00 AM | Permalink

    It’s worth reading the lengthy comments by ‘John’ at Bishop Hill on Alan Kendal. He seems to me to have been the victim of another example of bullying by ‘The Team’. There are clear and determined efforts to pull rank by Jones in order to shut Kendal up. ‘Fortunately’ (Jones’s word) Kendal is to retire soon (he says). Sickening.

  9. Martin A
    Posted Nov 24, 2011 at 7:10 AM | Permalink

    Dr Kendall definitely seems to have been a bit of a denier. Definitely not a Team player.

    2006 article from The Independent:

  10. Posted Nov 24, 2011 at 7:12 AM | Permalink

    Earlier on in that message, PJ says “I have stopped sending data out to anybody after the stupid comment on Climate Audit by Peter Webster“. It’s Sep 25, 2009 and the only possibly related thing I can find is the Jul 24 post

    There is no comment (stupid or otherwise) by Webster. Possibly, PJ was incorrectly recollecting what had happened, and simply considered “stupid” Webster’s telling Steve that he had received the data.

    Could anybody confirm pls?

  11. Robert
    Posted Nov 25, 2011 at 7:08 PM | Permalink

    Question for Steve Mc and others.

    Just read through the new sea ice reconstruction Kinnard et al. 2011

    And im really wondering about the stats.. Im no expert but some of it seems pretty arguable. Any thoughts?

  12. Posted Nov 26, 2011 at 11:20 AM | Permalink

    I’ve distilled Kendall’s story from 1999 to 2009 here. I think it is highly revealing, both of what Team members complain that the emails lack, ie context; and of the shadiness of omitting the key witnesses Steve McIntyre, Willis Eschenbach and Douglas Kenyon at the Oxburgh and Muir Russell “enquiries”.

    • Hu McCulloch
      Posted Nov 26, 2011 at 11:57 AM | Permalink

      Lucy — Your comment on Kendall on an unrelated thread over at WUWT deserves to be a CA or WUWT post in itself!

    • Posted Nov 26, 2011 at 12:04 PM | Permalink

      Yes, that look extremely helpful, Lucy.

One Trackback

  1. […] is curious and amusing. A few days back it was reported that there was a CG2 email from Phil Jones where he laments some skeptical slides being used in a […]

%d bloggers like this: