Climategate expert: findings 'robust'
Updated on 01 March 2010
The scientific findings on climate change are "robust and verifiable", the expert at the centre of the controversy over global warming data insisted today. Tom Clarke reports.
Professor Phil Jones. the scientist at the centre of the Climategate row, was being questioned by MPs over claims that leaked emails from the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit show evidence that experts hid, manipulated or deleted data.
Professor Jones defended himself in front of the MPs over a series of emails he sent.
The professor was challenged about an email to a climate change sceptic, in which he admits he doesn't want to send him data because he was worried it would be misused. The emails were leaked after a server at the University of East Anglia was hacked last year.
They seemed to suggest data was being manipulated, and it is claimed they show Professor Jones had deleted some data. But in front of the Commons science and technology committee Professor Jones said most were taken out of context.
He told the MPs the CRU did withhold raw station data about global temperatures from around the world - but said that the same information was publicly available.
"Most of the same basic data are available in the United States... People have been able to take the data, do what ever methods of assessment of the quality of the data and derive their own gridded product and compare that to other workers."
The professor has stepped down as chair of CRU whilst an independent inquiry takes place. He admitted he had not released data about his work because it was not standard practice to do so.
He also said the scientific journals which had published his papers had never asked to see it. On questions as to whether he had deliberately set out to manipulate the peer review system by deliberately stopping some papers being published, Professor Jones said these emails referred to two papers that were already in the public domain.
"In some of the emails I was just commenting that I didn't think those papers were any good" he told the MPs. "I think that any scientist who reads a paper would think some papers were good and some were bad. I was just commenting on that."
He went on: "You're only seeing a tenth of one per cent of my emails in this group. l don't think there's anything in those emails that supports any views that I or the CRU are trying to pervert the peer review process in any way. I've just been giving my views on specific papers."
Professor Jones insisted the scientific findings on climate change were robust and verifiable.
