Climategate, one year later

Above all, I would teach him to tell the truth. Truth-telling, I have found, is the key to responsible citizenship. The thousands of criminals I have seen in 40 years of law enforcement have had one thing in common: Every single one was a liar.
J. Edgar Hoover

Today is the first anniversary of Climategate. For those who have been living in a cave for the last year, Climategate was the release of over a thousand emails sent and received between the University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU) and other climate experts in colleges or government organizations from around the world. What they revealed was conspiratorial fraud in adjusting temperature records so that they indicated ongoing warming of the world. The data, almost all paid for by tax dollars, is being used to direct government policies involving hundreds of billions of additional taxpayer dollars.

There was supposedly an initial police investigation of the “hacking” of the emails, but no police report was ever written. Due to the implications of fraud, destruction of evidence and refusal to obey the Freedom of Information Act, there was ample reason for an investigation. Oddly enough, there were three “investigations” into the actions of those named in the emails. These investigations were done by handpicked commissions with all the expertise of a group of ten-year-old boys in a tree house investigating whether or not Billy had kissed a girl. Writing as a law enforcement officer with thirty-seven years experience, I can state that none of those three so-called investigations was even looking for truth, much less a criminal enterprise fraud.

To put all the Climategate controversy to rest, an investigation needs to be done by either Interpol or a specialized police fraud unit. This is not a who-done-it.

Basic investigation will reveal how the Climategate emails managed to appear on the internet. From the array of emails, an investigator might speculate that it was done with someone who had access and time to peruse and select the files, someone working at CRU or at the very least having free access to all the CRU files: a whistleblower, not a hacker. The posted files indicate that there are many more emails, which were not posted.

There is more than enough information in the emails to show criminal collusion and fraud, involving the manipulation of data, to launch a probing investigation. An investigation would involve interview and/or interrogation of all parties involved, a data dump of all the CRU files for additional emails, an extension of the investigation to the other entities (that is why I mentioned Interpol) named in the emails, as well as a data dump of their computer files.

After that, it is the tedious job of collating the emails and building an email tree to see just how far the fraud extends. It may take another year, then the indictments can be opened and the arrests can be made.

Climategate, one year later. It is time to do something.

Published in: on November 19, 2010 at 1:48 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: