Hacked: Sensitive Documents Lifted from Hadley Climate Center - Environmental Capital - WSJ

The whole affair has much of the blogosphere alight. Blogs skeptical of man-made global warming see blood in the water.

Breaking: Hackers Infiltrate World's Leading Climate Research Unit : TreeHugger

Plenty of facts remain to emerge before we go spinning our climate change denier conspiracy theories, so stay tuned--things could get interesting.

Infosecurity (UK) - Hackers hit leading UK climate research unit

The big question, the Cyber-Ark director noted, is why the University's CRU hadn't installed some form of security on the potentially explosive data held on its servers.

And, he explained, with references to the US government's apparently negative stance on climate change - which former vice president Al Gore has been trying to publicise for years - the data breach could cause ructions on Capitol Hill.

"Once the political fall-out from this data breach incident has settled, questions will undoubtedly be asked by those in charge about why better IT security systems weren't installed on the University CRU's servers", he said.

"I find it astonishing that politically sensitive data like this wasn't kept under highly encrypted protection."

"This data leak has the potential to add weight to the climate change cause, as well as acting as a case study on the need for secure collaborative data working."

[Fraudsters say the darndest things] | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

Obviously, under no circumstances should any of this get back to Pielke.
...
So, if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC, then this would be significant for the global mean – but we’d still have to explain the land blip.
...
[Bolt] Keeping sceptic Chris de Freitas out of the IPCC reports:

The other paper by MM is just garbage – as you knew. De Freitas again. Pielke is also losing all credibility as well by replying to the mad Finn as well – frequently as I see it. I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. K and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is !