Science vs. Politics: Tipping Points in Climate Change Communication

[NeoDevin]

Have you read CRU's webpage on "Availabilty"? I posted the link in a previous post. They state that they will share the data with other "academics" but not third parties.

Yes I've read it, assuming you're referring to http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/availability/" . If there's a page other than this, then I missed it. Let me know and I will read it as well. It specifically does not say 'they will share the data with other "academics" '.

Since the early 1980s, some NMSs, other organizations and individual scientists have given or sold us (see Hulme, 1994, for a summary of European data collection efforts) additional data for inclusion in the gridded datasets, often on the understanding that the data are only used for academic purposes with the full permission of the NMSs, organizations and scientists and the original station data are not passed onto third parties.

Here "third parties" clearly includes researchers outside of the CRU.

These data are not ours to provide without the full permission of the relevant NMSs, organizations and scientists. We point enquirers to the GHCN web site.

No caveats like "unless the enquirer is a researcher".

They even give one reason why some stations don't want their data released:

The problem is a generic issue and arises from the need of many NMSs to be or aim to be cost neutral (i.e. sell the data to recoup the costs of making observations and preparing the data).

Edit: If I've somehow missed a section of that page which says that they will share it with other researchers, please quote the relevant section and I will apologize.

 

[Evo]

Here "third parties" clearly includes researchers outside of the CRU.

Since the early 1980s, some NMSs, other organizations and individual scientists have given or sold us (see Hulme, 1994, for a summary of European data collection efforts) additional data for inclusion in the gridded datasets, often on the understanding that the data are only used for academic purposes with the full permission of the NMSs, organizations and scientists and the original station data are not passed onto third parties

I would have to disagree based on the letter that CRU sent Pielke. If the specific data he had requested was restricted due to some non-disclosure agreement, then why wouldn't they say this? Why did they instead state that they no longer had the data? Why did CRU claim that they didn't retain data because they didn't have the space?

At least you, NeoDevin, can make concise, to the point posts, I have to read so many posts each day, you have no idea how much I appreciate that. Since my time is not unlimited, I can't wade through verbose posts unless they are reported to me, which they too often are.

Until the CRU formally retracts their statement that they threw away the data, I will have to accept what they say. Anyone making up excuses for them, unless they have been appointed the new CRU spokesperson, is pointless. CRU has made their statement in the press.

Anyway a much more interesting point of discussion, is the coded data. I'll be posting that in a bit.