Skip to content

Arizona Supreme Court Orders Release Of Climategate-Related Emails

December 7, 2017

By Paul Homewood


h/t CheshireRed


Hot off the press:



Washington, D.C. – Late last week Arizona Superior Court Justice James Marner granted the Energy & Environment Legal Institute’s (E&E Legal’s) motion requesting release of ‘Climategate’ related emails withheld for years by the University of Arizona (UofA).


The Court’s ruling followed on the Arizona Board of Regents’ (AzBOR’s) unsuccessful appeal of a similar ruling by the same Court on June 14, 2016 ordering release of the emails in question.

In his ruling, Judge Marner stated, “The comment in the June 14, 2016 ruling regarding the creation of an academic privilege through legislation seems to have caused much confusion to the point that the Court of Appeals concluded this Court somehow remained ignorant of an argument raised in Defendant AzBOR’s answer and amended answer, subsequent pleadings and in at least two amicus briefs. With this ruling, the Court hopes to reassure the Court of Appeals and the parties that all arguments made at the trial level were considered and all relevant law applied.”

The original public records request and the subsequent suit by E&E Legal made necessary by the U of A’s refusal to release the records relating to what the London Telegraph’s Christopher Booker called “the worst scientific scandal of our generation.”  Specifically, the documents are emails relating to the notorious global warming “Hockey Stick”, and the group that made it famous, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Following E&E Legal’s public records request to UofA, the University acknowledged resistance from the professors involved — both of whom, E&E Legal pointed out to the court, were improperly allowed to decide what emails were responsive to the request, and which ones they would allow the University to produce. U of A ultimately produced several hundred responsive emails.

Accompanying this production was an instructive 213-page roadmap of several hundred emails the academics insisted could not be released, involving either the “Hockey Stick” or IPCC. Unfortunately the indexes were also deliberately  scarce on details, though they do lay out correspondence between the Hockey Stick and IPCC authors (also identifying, e.g., emails about Professor and IPCC coordinating lead author Jonathan Overpeck’s work at the University for the environmentalist pressure group Union of Concerned Scientists, and emails to and from Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia, home to ClimateGate).

E&E Legal’s initial complaint explained how these emails, produced using taxpayer resources, involve two academics with: “…a history of using University (public) resources — including to send and receive the emails at issue in this case — for work-related participation in related organizations including the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (“IPCC”), which was the subject of many of the most controversial emails produced, sent, received and/or held on publicly funded computer assets in the ‘Climategate’ leaks.”

Through the Climategate leaks, and releases under various freedom of information laws, the public has learned of troubling practices by a network of publicly funded academics involving, among other things, questionable use of statistics, organized efforts to subvert transparency laws in the United States and United Kingdom, campaigns to keep dissenting work from publication, recruiting journalists to target opponents and retaliation against scientists and editors involved in publishing dissenting work.

Closely following a model pioneered by Greenpeace seeking emails and other records of University of Virginia climate science faculty, E&E legal has been requesting and obtaining information held by publicly funded agencies and universities related to the important public policy issue of alleged catastrophic man-made global warming, and related policy demands.


Of course the original Climategate emails only directly concerned the UEA. There is undoubtedly much else out there at other sites.

The fact that the University of Arizona illegally withheld hundreds of emails strongly suggests that they have a lot to hide.

Get the popcorn ready!

  1. Joe Public permalink
    December 7, 2017 10:16 pm

    “Closely following a model pioneered by Greenpeace seeking emails and other records ….”

    Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals #4

    • Nigel S permalink
      December 8, 2017 9:33 am

      For ’tis the sport to have the engineer
      Hoist with his own petard: and ‘t shall go hard
      But I will delve one yard below their mines,
      And blow them at the moon: O, ’tis most sweet,

    • Nigel S permalink
      December 8, 2017 9:37 am

      Greenpeace adds that its attacks on Resolute “are without question non-verifiable statements of subjective opinion and at most non-actionable rhetorical hyperbole.”

      They’re not laughing now!

    • Mike Jackson permalink
      December 8, 2017 12:58 pm

      I had noted that quote also, Joe.

      My comment of choice is “oh, the irony!”

      Or alternatively, “serves the buggers right!”

  2. December 7, 2017 10:52 pm

    Saw this this morning my time. The back story is this production was ordered last year and the order was not obeyed because of supposed court order language confusion. So this time the unhappy judge was crisp and clear. Hard to imagine there is not something awful AU was trying to hide. Same as the Vermont AG trying to avoid FOIA over the Schneiderman Exxon nonsense where the Virgin Islands AG already folded, the Massachusetts AG stepped back out of the process, and the Vermont AG is desparately trying to avoid discovery and hang in.

  3. Mack permalink
    December 7, 2017 11:01 pm

    Newsflash! Series of blackouts reported in Arizona following over active shredding machines tripping the grid followed by a series of forest fires caused by suspicious hard drive explosions. Very possibly mann made in nature. Very peculiar.

    • Athelstan permalink
      December 7, 2017 11:32 pm

      naughty, very naughty.

      One of the cleverest acts of thinking ahead and destroying the evidence in recent memery, was, when bliar’s expenses chits all fell ‘accidentally’ into the paper mincer, what a surprise…………….not. Of course, if it had been left up to him, we’d have known but not her, you have to wake up very early in the morning to out weasel a champion weasel.

      @ The UoA, we’ll have to wait and see.

    • December 8, 2017 2:12 am

      Ditto Hillary’s 33,000 emails erased by Bleachbit from her own unofficial private server when she was Secretary of State.

  4. December 7, 2017 11:35 pm

    The emperor has no clothes but does not want you to know.

  5. L. Douglas permalink
    December 8, 2017 12:18 am

    Popcorn indeed. This is great. Given the emailers there’s bound to be at least a few juicy tidbits in this. All helps.

  6. Broadlands permalink
    December 8, 2017 2:06 am

    As a refresher on “Climategate”…

  7. Tom Dowter permalink
    December 8, 2017 4:31 am

    I don’t think that the e-mails will tell us much about the “hockey stick”. This is because it was more of a ghastly mistake rather than any deliberate dishonesty.

    Mann’s original paper was, quite justifiably, criticized by McIntyre and McKitrick. However, there have been later versions published by various people, including Mann himself. These papers avoid the original mistakes pointed out by our two Canadian raincoats. Nevertheless I think that they are all unsound.

    It seems to me that all of the hockey stick papers are more of a reconstruction of atmospheric CO2 concentrations rather than of temperature. Atmospheric CO2 does indeed follow a hockey stick shape. In fact, it seems to be inevitable that any reconstruction that contains a significant proportion of tree rings in its data will, if combined with the principal component analysis technique, produce such a result.

    It is well known that many tree ring series simply fail to pick up the modern, post ~ 1960, warming. This is the so-called “divergence problem”. This demonstrates that tree rings are unreliable proxies for temperature, and may not even be proxies for temperature at all.

    If we turn our attention to photosynthesis, we would expect tree ring growth to be a hotchpotch of water, carbon dioxide and sunlight with temperature and soil nutrients playing a relatively minor role. Where there is plenty of water and CO2, tree ring widths will be mainly affected by sunlight. This will, itself, be a combination of cloud cover and insolation. Given that fluctuations in temperature correlate reasonably well with cloud cover, one would expect that some tree rings would also correlate with temperatures, even though they are not directly proxies for them. If the standard theory for the little ice age is correct, then we would expect tree rings to appear to pick it up. It is probably these factors that led to the widespread belief that tree rings could be used as temperature proxies. Had tree rings been only thought of as such proxies more recently, then it is likely that the divergence problem would have squashed the idea that they were any use.

    On the other hand, where there is plenty of water and sunlight, we would expect tree ring widths to be a proxy for carbon dioxide. The problem with PCA as used by the hockey team, is that it assumes that the apparently most reliable proxies in one period will also be the most reliable ones in all other periods. Ditto for the least reliable. This is an extremely bold assumption. In fact, using such a technique when we include the modern warming will result in high weightings for those few, probably CO2, proxies that appear to pick up the modern warming and much lower weightings for others. Given this, a hockey stick is virtually inevitable.

    • AZ1971 permalink
      December 8, 2017 5:41 am

      This demonstrates that tree rings are unreliable proxies for temperature, and may not even be proxies for temperature at all.

      That’s because dendrochronology is a pseudoscience. End of story, case closed.

      • Bitter&twisted permalink
        December 8, 2017 8:20 am

        Dendrochronology is fine. It is dendroclimatology that is rubbish.

    • Graeme No.3 permalink
      December 8, 2017 11:39 am

      Tom Dowter:

      I own a book published in 1975 in which tree rings are dismissed as quite unreliable. Not the author’s view but the general consensus of those involved in that edge of science, from the mid 1960’s.
      That 30 years later it was suddenly pushed as the infallible record reflects on the abilities of those who used it for their ends, but then many of them lacked formal qualifications in Science.

    • Mike Jackson permalink
      December 8, 2017 1:05 pm

      Tree rings are proxies for weather! Of which CO2 is a part, as are sun, rain, wind, heat, cold, wind from a different direction. Then there is location, competitive growth, nibbling rabbits, deer sharpening their antlers, wind-born infections, volcanic dust …

      That anybody ever thought to pick out one signal from all that stuff beggars belief.

    • December 8, 2017 1:29 pm

      As I have pointed out before and recently, dendrochronology has its uses. Dating can be done by overlapping tree ring cores. Long term trends showing prolonged drought, such as that which led to the demise of Mesa Verde, etc. or long term cold spells or warm spells or periods of high rainfall can be inferred using this method. HOWEVER, CO2 and other specific items cannot be determined as there is too much “noise.” So many factors can mask what is happening–did that tree grow near water or not near water, did a nearby tree have roots into a pocket of moisture? I read some of the emails when they came out in ca. 2009. There was one data base from the Yamal Peninsula of some 250 trees, but they “chose” 24 as I remember, because they had the “right stuff.” Sorry, that is not science as they cherry picked and 24 trees is too small a data base to mean squat. I believe it was Briffa who based a statement on THREE trees. Seriously?

      What dendrochronology HAS shown is a corroboration of the Little Ice Age. This led to the hypothesis that Stradivarius violins may have resulted from the cold of the LIA slowing down the growth significantly and providing the wood with that characteristic sound.

      However, Mann and his merry band REMOVED the Little Ice Age and the previous Medieval Warming from history in order to create his “straight” hockey stick handle. The hockey stick was far from inevitable, it was fabricated.

    • Simon from Ashby permalink
      December 8, 2017 1:44 pm

      I don’t accept that CO2 Concentrations follow a “hockey Stick” graph signal.

      180 Years of Atmospheric Co2 Gas Analysis by Chemical Methods by Ernst George beck

      Shows varying CO2 levels – “Since 1812, the CO2 concentration in northern hemispheric air has fluctuated exhibiting three high level maxima around 1825, 1857 and 1942 the latter showing more than 400 ppm”.

      CO2 concentrations fluctuate naturally, diurnally, seasonally and with cyclical variations in temperature. Over the period the measurements were taken CO2 Concentrations and temperature show good correlation, which diverges in recent decades. Suggesting that, naturally, CO2 Concentrations are driven by temperature.

    • Gerry, England permalink
      December 8, 2017 1:51 pm

      I disagree – it was totally deliberate as it was designed to remove the inconvenient Medieval Warm Period since it is always fun to ask a warmist about this. To date no farming on Greenland. Mann also used ‘Mike’s nature trick’ to ‘hide the decline’ at the end of the graph when the treemometry went in the wrong direction so he grafted on the instrument data. Keith Briffa did try to warn Mann that trees weren’t reliable. The subsequent attempts by Mann’s disciples have all been shot down.

    • sean2829 permalink
      December 9, 2017 1:54 am

      Look at all the instrumental data, particularly the seasonal info. Tree ring data only responds to temperatures in the growing season, Arctic summers. Instrumental records show Arctic summers aren’t warming but the fall winter and spring are so no change in tree rings is consistent with summer tempurature tends but says nothing about other seasons. That’s why it’s dangerous to splice data measured different ways together.

  8. markl permalink
    December 8, 2017 4:52 am

    “…questionable use of statistics, organized efforts to subvert transparency laws in the United States and United Kingdom, campaigns to keep dissenting work from publication, recruiting journalists to target opponents and retaliation against scientists and editors involved in publishing dissenting work….” sounds like the organized crime that it is.

  9. tom0mason permalink
    December 8, 2017 9:32 am

    Oh good another catalog of the thousand of trip all over the world as they organized this fiasco. Follow the money!

  10. Athelstan permalink
    December 8, 2017 12:26 pm

    As has been said, Canadians McIntyre and McKittrick did the numbers and came up with what a fudge, wayward stats and definitely demolished the shebang.

    People like our host on here, Mr. Paul Homewood, and some others Lucia, Jennifer, Judith and Jo, would dearly love to get hold of some more data sets emails the lot, he’d, they’d have a field day.

    For us lower mortals – well me actually…… imho this is how its going – albeit far too slowly.

    Just like a record left in the sun, the playing dirge, the global loonytune is getting more warped by the day……………YOU SEE; they’ve tried it all and no one is listening, even the latest ‘Harvey’………polar bear trick fell on deaf ears, blue planet has been sunk (oh puh-leeze couldn’t resist it) without trace and the annual gob fest UNIPCC whatevah went phutt and off before it got going – like a damp squib on a very dark night. Mr Trump is slowly but surely killing off the great US green global warming giant and that only leaves one idiot player – the UK, where the needle stuck in global warming games without frontiere’s since 1992 and still with the evil spectre of maurice strong conducting the mad din of noise of phoney warming tunes.

    • December 8, 2017 1:33 pm

      Funny thing about emails. They tend to get spread around, sort of like a virus and likely will return to infect the perps.

  11. Coeur de Lion permalink
    December 8, 2017 2:59 pm

    I love ‘publicly funded’.

Comments are closed.

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: