cc: "Vincent Chris Prof \(ENV\) e470" <C.Vincent@uea.ac.uk>
date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:59:50 +0100
from: "Mcgarvie Michael Mr \(ACAD\)" <M.Mcgarvie@uea.ac.uk>
subject: RE: Some possible help/advice needed
to: "Phil Jones" <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>

Phil,

I have been dipping occasionally into the climateaudit website during
our  interactions the past couple of months as we have dealt with the
flurry of FOIA requests.  I can therefore see how it feels to you that
you are being virtually stalked.

You have dealt with the FOIA requests in an open and helpful way. (I am
not sure if Chris is aware of the matter with the various requests etc.
They all centre around the data used in the papers quoted in the message
from Mr Keenan to Dr Wang). Dave Palmer (Chris - he is the central FOIA
contact) has mentioned that we can refuse to deal with a request if we
perceive it to be vexatious.  The tone and content of the message to Dr
Wang is clearly unacceptable. We may well need to invoke the vexatious
clause for any requests from Mr Keenan and may need to extend this to
other climateaudit.org contributors. They are clearly not interested in
having a balanced debate about the issues. 

If a claim were made against you on the basis of misconduct in research
there is a procedure that would be invoked. One of the reasons for the
procedure is "to protect researchers against malicious, frivolous or
ill-founded allegations". The initial stage of the procedure is called
"screening" whereby it can be reviewed to see whether there is a case to
take forward etc.  So, if any claim was made about misconduct in
research relating to papers published in very reputable, refereed
journals I am sure that it could be dealt with quickly etc. 

Best wishes

Michael


 
Michael McGarvie
Senior Faculty Manager
Faculty of Science
Room 0.22C
University of East Anglia
Norwich NR4 7TJ
tel: 01603 593229
fax: 01603 593045
m.mcgarvie@uea.ac.uk
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Jones [mailto:p.jones@uea.ac.uk] 
Sent: 20 April 2007 14:48
To: Vincent Chris Prof (ENV) e470; Mcgarvie Michael Mr (ACAD) k364
Subject: Some possible help/advice needed


  Chris, Michael,
      See the email below. I'm happy to ignore this, but I reckon
  this isn't going to go away. I've suggested to my co-author
(Wei-Chyung Wang)
  from the 1990 paper that he gets advice from his University.
  Who do I go to for advice within the Science Faculty? I just
  wonder if there is anything UEA can do in response to his threat.
  No rush at the moment as it isn't aimed at me.
     I think this is malicious by the way and totally without
foundation.
  This has come as a direct result of sending information under
  the FOIA. I'm also sure we are likely to get more requests
  as the climate skeptics get desperate.
     This sort of thing doesn't make for a happy research environment.
  It is a bit like I'm being virtually stalked.

  Cheers
  Phil


>From: "D.J. Keenan" <doug.keenan@informath.org>
>To: "Wei-Chyung Wang" <wang@climate.cestm.albany.edu>
>Cc: "Phil Jones" <p.jones@uea.ac.uk>
>Subject: retraction request
>Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 13:31:15 +0100
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028
>X-UEA-Spam-Score: 0.0
>X-UEA-Spam-Level: /
>X-UEA-Spam-Flag: NO
>
>Dear Dr. Wang,
>Regarding the Chinese meteorological data analyzed by Wang et al. 
>[GRL, 1990] and Jones et al. [Nature, 1990], it now seems clear that 
>there are severe problems.  In particular,  the data was obtained 
>from 84 meteorological stations that can be classified as follows.
>    49 have no histories    08 have inconsistent histories    18 
> have substantial relocations    02 have single-year 
> relocations    07 have no relocations Furthermore, some of the 
> relocations are very distant--over 20 km.
>Others are to greatly different environments, as illustrated 
>here:    http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1323#comment-102970
>
>The above contradicts the published claim to have considered the 
>histories of the stations, especially for the 49 stations that have 
>no histories.  Yet the claim is crucial for the research conclusions.
>
>I e-mailed you about this on April 11th.  I also phoned you on April 
>13th: you said that you were in a meeting and would get back to 
>me.  I have received no response.
>
>I ask you to retract your GRL paper, in full, and to retract the 
>claims made in Nature about the Chinese data.  If you do not do so, 
>I intend to publicly submit an allegation of research misconduct to 
>your university at Albany.
>
>
>Douglas J. Keenan
>http://www.informath.org
>phone + 44 20 7537 4122
>The Limehouse Cut, London E14 6N, UK

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit        Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences    Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich                          Email    p.jones@uea.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----


