Who is behind the global warming e-mails hacking?

[murdoch]

As the coverage of the global warming e-mails has covered mostly everything, it has become apparent that nothing really damaging came out. Yes, it is embarrassing when everyone can see that you referred in private to those who are obstructing you as jerks and idiots, but by and large the fallout of this all is overblown.

Why should scientists be on the defensive against the anonymous felon or felons who broke the law in order to get this response which he/she/they wants? Senator Inhofe is promoting these criminals to where he is asking for Senate hearings - not on the criminals who were involved in this, but against their victims, the scientists they targeted.

Which causes me to wonder - with the massive amounts of money that the largest company in the world, ExxonMobil, spends on attacking global warming, along with other of the largest corporations in the world - with private armies and intelligence services like Blackwater, Halliburton and the like popping up - with the right losing elections and resorting to Glenn Beck tea party town hall hysteria - who is behind this hacking? We know how much the US military and especially military contractors spend on "information warfare" training. They're actually trained to hack into enemies computers.

Cui bono? Who gains? Who gained from this crime? The corporate media has covered very little the crime that has taken place. Who was behind it?

The fact that this comes out just as Obama is headed to Copenhagen is very suspicious as well. It is released right at the moment of maximum political impact.

[timeforpeace]

1. Who are the morans who wrote the emails?

[Warpy]

2. My best guess is that it was an insider who knew his job was on the line

and broke into the system internally before he was canned. Such a person has motive, means and opportunity.

He then shopped the emails around and was rewarded handsomely for them, a good addition to the unemployment checks that were running out.

I would suggest they check all the people they pink slipped or fired within the last year.

[endless october]

3. my guess is a scientist that saw an insular group of scientists acting irresponsibly

and sought to expose them. wouldn't be surprised if it was someone involved in the study of global warming, perhaps even a believer. and most likely somebody with access to one of the computers. doubt it's a "hacker" at all, honestly. it's an inside job.

there's little doubt the science behind the theory has merit, but this group of scientists still screwed up.

as a scientist, if i were to cherry pick data / try to skirt FOIA requests / not release or give others access to conflicting data, my reputation would be ruined. as scientists, they know the rules, and they know the game.

this is good for science in general, because it is just one more warning to act responsibly. also, it will hopefully move the study of climate change into more honest hands. when the data supports the theory, we need that data to come from those we can trust.

[timeforpeace]

4. Very well said, thanks.

[GMA]

5. I'm sticking with the paradigm shift theory,

which is that the best way to get reliable scientific data, once a particular field has been compromised (for money, politics, power, peer pressure, prestige, etc.), is to wait for the old scientists to die off.

This is looking more and more like dirty science, and environmentalists are downright religious in their devotion. There's just no arguing with them once they've been "converted".

Okay, now go ahead and yell at me, but I'm convinced there's more corruption here than we know, and that it's got a lot to do with power and money, and very little to do with a clean planet and we the people.