4 ms·

Pretending the climate email leak isn't a crisis won't make it go away

Scott_MacGregor 17y ago
When the truth is found to be lies, and all the joy within you dies. If these e-mails are true this looks like it’s going to be a bitter pill to swallow for a lot of people. Many people have invested a lot of money and time into this issue, from buying new tiny fuel efficient cars to investing a lot of money in green energy businesses. Plus many have their reputations at stake here too. Now that it is starting to look like this whole issue was some kind of hoax, I see two separate groups that may surface here. Those who intended to profit from this politically and financially, and those who are into it for purely environmental reasons. It seems if there is no real causative environmental impact happening, the pure environmentalist should be happy to embrace the truth at this point whereas those who were into it for other reasons may still attempt to spin and re-spin facts and push for further legislation and increased taxes. Another thing to consider is now that it has become a political issue and is at the global center of attention a lot of people are going to look like they were participating in something that was a fraud and a deception. Yet I’m sure many of them had no idea they were being mislead and should not be lumped in with the perpetrators of the deception, if it ultimately proves to be a deception. When the truth is found to be lies, and all the joy within you dies... (Jefferson Airplane--San Francisco, CA 1967) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO5Rc5LjOsM&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO5Rc5LjOsM&feature=relat...
- mr_eel 17y ago
  "Now that it is starting to look like this whole issue was some kind of hoax..." Or maybe, this is actually a small piece of erroneous data within a larger body of evidence. Meaning; yes it's awful, but it's not as significant as some would like to think. The idea that these goings on invalidate the research of thousands of independent groups is _ridiculous_. People need to look at the bigger picture, not just the parts that validate thier preconceptions. That goes for anyone, within _any_ debate.
tokenadult 17y ago
The author of the submitted article certainly appears to be in agreement with the authors of purported disclosed emails as to public policy, and he is pained by their troubles. But he notes, "When it comes to his handling of Freedom of Information requests, Professor Jones might struggle even to use a technical defence. If you take the wording literally, in one case he appears to be suggesting that emails subject to a request be deleted, which means that he seems to be advocating potentially criminal activity. Even if no other message had been hacked, this would be sufficient to ensure his resignation as head of the unit." That's really where responsibility has to be here: if someone has a legal obligation to be transparent in handling organizational documents, he has no fitness to run the organization if he refuses that responsibility. Any follow-up inquiry may as well focus on that point to decide the issue of who should be running the organization.
MaysonL 17y ago
Here's an article to ponder: http://www.thestar.com/business/cleanbreak/article/729339--hamilton-why-media-tell-climate-story-poorly http://www.thestar.com/business/cleanbreak/article/729339--h....

When the truth is found to be lies, and all the joy within you dies. If these e-mails are true this looks like it’s going to be a bitter pill to swallow for a lot of people. Many people have invested a lot of money and time into this issue, from buying new tiny fuel efficient cars to investing a lot of money in green energy businesses. Plus many have their reputations at stake here too. Now that it is starting to look like this whole issue was some kind of hoax, I see two separate groups that may surface here. Those who intended to profit from this politically and financially, and those who are into it for purely environmental reasons. It seems if there is no real causative environmental impact happening, the pure environmentalist should be happy to embrace the truth at this point whereas those who were into it for other reasons may still attempt to spin and re-spin facts and push for further legislation and increased taxes. Another thing to consider is now that it has become a political issue and is at the global center of attention a lot of people are going to look like they were participating in something that was a fraud and a deception. Yet I’m sure many of them had no idea they were being mislead and should not be lumped in with the perpetrators of the deception, if it ultimately proves to be a deception. When the truth is found to be lies, and all the joy within you dies... (Jefferson Airplane--San Francisco, CA 1967) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO5Rc5LjOsM&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO5Rc5LjOsM&feature=relat...

mr_eel 17y ago
"Now that it is starting to look like this whole issue was some kind of hoax..." Or maybe, this is actually a small piece of erroneous data within a larger body of evidence. Meaning; yes it's awful, but it's not as significant as some would like to think. The idea that these goings on invalidate the research of thousands of independent groups is _ridiculous_. People need to look at the bigger picture, not just the parts that validate thier preconceptions. That goes for anyone, within _any_ debate.

tokenadult 17y ago

The author of the submitted article certainly appears to be in agreement with the authors of purported disclosed emails as to public policy, and he is pained by their troubles. But he notes, "When it comes to his handling of Freedom of Information requests, Professor Jones might struggle even to use a technical defence. If you take the wording literally, in one case he appears to be suggesting that emails subject to a request be deleted, which means that he seems to be advocating potentially criminal activity. Even if no other message had been hacked, this would be sufficient to ensure his resignation as head of the unit." That's really where responsibility has to be here: if someone has a legal obligation to be transparent in handling organizational documents, he has no fitness to run the organization if he refuses that responsibility. Any follow-up inquiry may as well focus on that point to decide the issue of who should be running the organization.

MaysonL 17y ago

Here's an article to ponder: http://www.thestar.com/business/cleanbreak/article/729339--hamilton-why-media-tell-climate-story-poorly http://www.thestar.com/business/cleanbreak/article/729339--h....