Tag Archives: wahl

Wahl Transcript Excerpt

From Capitol Hill come excerpted notes from the interview transcript between the NOAA Inspector General and Eugene Wahl. I am advised that it’s not a continuous chain, with some back and forth between the paragraphs excluded. I am advised that the excluded sections, often lengthy, do not place the excerpts in any different light than […]

New Light on “Delete Any Emails”

New light today on Phil Jones’ notorious request that Mann, Briffa, Wahl and Ammann “delete any emails”.

East Anglia: More Sucking and Blowing

David Holland’s well-known FOI 08-31 included the following request: 1. The IPCC stated on July 1, 2006: “We are very grateful to the many reviewers of the second draft of the Working Group I contribution to the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report for suggestions received on issues of balance and citation of additional scientific literature.” Did […]

Did Jones Delete Emails?

It turns out that Muir Russell didn’t bother asking, since that would have exposed Jones to potential liability.

An “Objective Arbiter” CRU-Style

Muir Russell reported Briffa’s claim that “Wahl was asked for comment on text as a knowledgeable and objective arbiter”. The indolent Muir Russell did not comment on whether Briffa’s description of Wahl as “objective” was plausible. In a Climategate letter of July 27, 2006, Wahl wrote to Briffa (733. 1155402164.txt): I’ve also been a lot […]

“Without oversight or challenge”

One of my long-standing concerns of Climate Audit and its readers has been a concern over the role of Eugene Wahl in changing the IPCC assessment of the McMc-Mann dispute in the Final Report – a role that Fred Pearce described in The Climate Files as a “subversion” of IPCC policies of openness and transparency. […]

Wahl-Briffa Attachments Were Deleted

The Muir Russell Inquiry was supposed to examine the email controversy. One of the issues that they purported to examine was the surreptitious Wahl-Briffa correspondence of 2006 that Fred Pearce described as a “direct subversion of the spirit of openness intended when the IPCC decided to put its internal reviews online”. In April 2010, I […]

East Anglia Covers Up Their Trick on Channel Four

Yesterday, I reported that the University of East Anglia had refused to release attachments to Climategate emails, attachments that would confirm that Wahl and Briffa had knowingly violated IPCC rules on review comments. Their excuse was, in effect, that Wahl and Briffa had agreed their violation of IPCC rules would be done in secret and […]

A Small FOI/EIR Success

As CA readers, CRU, the Met Office and a couple of other UK institutions had more or less stonewalled David Holland’s FOI requests. One of Holland’s particular interests is one that is perhaps a little appropriate/inappropriate for Easter Sunday – Caspar and the resurrected Jesus paper. Holland had tried for some years to determine exactly […]

Pielke Jr discusses the Bishop and the Stick

Roger Pielke Jr has written a gracious post , following up on Bishop Hill’s post and considering the issues as they pertain to science policy, and, in particular, the processes of peer review and due diligence, which have informed many of my posts. He refers to and reconsiders a post that I wrote for Prometheus […]