Redigerer E-post-lekkasjen ved Climatic Research Unit (avsnitt)

==Referanser==
<references>

<!-- Sorter referansene på Forfatter_Utgitt_Utgiver -->

<ref name=autogenerated1>[http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/387/387i.pdf House of Commons (Science and Technology Committee): The disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia – 24 March 2010]; besøkt 7. april 2010. Sitater fra rapportens ''summary'': «We believe that the focus on CRU and Professor Phil Jones, Director of CRU, in particular, has largely been misplaced.» «In the context of the sharing of data and methodologies, we consider that Professor Jones’s actions were in line with common practice in the climate science community. It is not standard practice in climate science to publish the raw data and the computer code in academic papers. However, climate science is a matter of great importance and the quality of the science should be irreproachable. We therefore consider that climate scientists should take steps to make available all the data that support their work (including raw data) and full methodological workings (including the computer codes). Had both been available, many of the problems at UEA could have been avoided.»</ref>

<ref name="om_Oxburgh">Rapporten ble avgitt 15. april 2010. 19. april kom en ny versjon. Denne var uendret bortsett fra et tillegg, som skyldtes at en del utsagn i rapporten og på pressekonferansen ved framlegging av denne var blitt mistolket i mediene: «For the avoidance of misunderstanding in the light of various press stories, it is important to be clear that the neither the panel report nor the press briefing intended to imply that any research group in the field of climate change had been deliberately misleading in any of their analyses or intentionally exaggerated their findings. Rather, the aim was to draw attention to the complexity of statistics in this field, and the need to use the best possible methods.»</ref>

<ref name="Oxburgh_2010-04-19_UEA_Panel_updated">{{Kilde www
 |url            = http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/CRUstatements/SAP
 |tittel         = Report of the International Panel set up by the University of East Anglia to examine the research of the Climatic Research Unit.
 |besøksdato    = 2010-04-19
 |forfatterlenke = Ron Oxburgh
 |medforfattere  = 
 |utgivelsesdato = 2010-04-19
 |format         = 
 |verk           = [[uea.ac.uk]]
 |utgiver        = [[University of East Anglia]]
 |sider          = 
 |språk         = engelsk
 |doi            = 
 |arkiv_url      = https://www.webcitation.org/5p6Wgvvbj?url=http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/CRUstatements/SAP
 |arkivdato      = 2010-04-19
 |sitat          = «We saw no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit and had it been there we believe that it is likely that we would have detected it.»
 |forfatter      = Oxburgh, Ron
 |url-status    = død 
}}</ref>

<ref name="sitater_fra_Oxburgh">I rapportens hovedkonklusjon punkt 1 omtales CRU som «a small group of dedicated if slightly disorganised researchers». I punkt 2 kommenteres forholdet til statistikk slik: «We cannot help remarking that it is very surprising that research in an area that depends so heavily on statistical methods has not been carried out in close collaboration with professional statisticians. Indeed there would be mutual benefit if there were closer collaboration and interaction between CRU and a much wider scientific group outside the relatively small international circle of temperature specialists.»</ref>

<ref name="David_Adam_1404010">[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/14/oxburgh-uea-cleared-malpractice David Adam: «Scientists cleared of malpractice in UEA's hacked emails inquiry»], fra [[Guardian|guardian.co.uk]] 14. april 2010; besøkt 10. mai 2010. «Researchers 'dedicated if slightly disorganised', but basic science was fair, finds inquiry commissioned by university.» «... CRU scientists had been naive over their use of statistics, but there was no evidence that the better techniques would have produced different results.» «The hockey-stick effect was genuine, Hand said, but the 1998 paper exaggerated it.»</ref>

<ref name="2010-02-06_it-networks">{{kilde www |url=http://it-networks.org/?p=222 |tittel=Arkivert kopi |besøksdato=2010-02-11 |url-status=død |arkivurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20100222065907/http://it-networks.org/?p=222 |arkivdato=2010-02-22 }}</ref>

<ref name="2010-04-06_CRU_statements">{{Kilde www
 |url         = http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/CRUstatements
 |tittel      = CRU statements - University of East Anglia (UEA)
 |besøksdato = 2010-04-06
 |utgiver     = [[University of East Anglia]]
 |arkiv_url   = https://www.webcitation.org/5or7YthQO?url=http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/CRUstatements
 |arkivdato   = 2010-04-09
 |url-status = død
}}</ref>

<ref name="Fahrenthold_2010-12-05_Washington_Post">{{Kilde www
 |url           = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/04/AR2009120404511.html
 |tittel        = In e-mails, science of warming is hot debate
 |utgiver       = [[Washington Post]]
 |medforfattere = Juliet, Eilperin
 |dato          = 2010-12-05
 |besøksdato   = 2010-04-03
 |arkiv_url     = https://www.webcitation.org/5or5yyZYh?url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/04/AR2009120404511.html
 |arkivdato     = 2010-04-09
 |sitat         = 
 |forfatter     = Fahrenthold, David A.
 |url-status   = død
}}</ref>

<ref name="Hauge_2009-11-22_Aftenposten">{{Kilde www
 |url            = http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/uriks/article3385865.ece
 |tittel         = Forskere uenige om «klima-mafia» Norsk professor har fått eposten hacket. Klimaskeptiker: - Dette er klimaets Watergate.
 |besøksdato    = 2010-03-08
 |medforfattere  = Espen A. Eik
 |utgivelsesdato = 2009-11-22
 |verk           = [[aftenposten.no]]
 |utgiver        = [[Aftenposten]]
 |arkiv_url      = https://www.webcitation.org/5o57B5GKO?url=http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/uriks/article3385865.ece
 |arkivdato      = 2010-03-08
 |sitat          = Professor Olav Martin Kvalheim på Kjemisk institutt ved Universitetet i Bergen går så langt som til å omtale avsløringen som «klimaets Watergate-skandale».  […] - Det dreier seg om en klimamafia. Jeg er veldig glad for at denne hackingen avslører hvordan de tenker og jobber, sier Kvalheim.
 |forfatter      = Hauge, Mari Torsdotter
 |url-status    = død 
}}</ref>

<ref name="Johnson_2009-11-23_WSJ">{{Kilde www
 |url         = http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125883405294859215.html
 |utgiver     = [[The Wall Street Journal]]
 |tittel      = Climate Emails Stoke Debate
 |dato        = 2009-11-23
 |besøksdato = 2010-04-03
 |arkiv_url   = https://www.webcitation.org/5or5ODMLS?url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125883405294859215.html
 |arkivdato   = 2010-04-09
 |sitat       = 
 |forfatter   = Johnson, Keith
 |url-status = død
}}</ref>

<ref name="Randerson_2010-01-27_Guardian">{{Cite news
  | first=James 
  | last=Randerson 
  | title=University in hacked climate change emails row broke FOI rules 
  | date=2010-01-27 
  | publisher= [[The Guardian]]
  | url =http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/27/uea-hacked-climate-emails-foi 
  | accessdate = 2010-01-28 
  | location=London
  | archiveurl = 
  | archivedate = 
  | quote =
 }}</ref>

<ref name="Watt_2009-11-24_wattsupwiththat">[http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/24/nov-24-statement-from-uea-on-the-cru-files/ Combined statements issued by the University of East Anglia], 24 November 2009.</ref>

<ref name="Webster_2010-01-28_Times">{{Kilde www
 |url            = http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7004936.ece
 |tittel         = Scientists in stolen e-mail scandal hid climate data
 |besøksdato    = 2010-03-08
 |utgivelsesdato = 2010-01-28
 |verk           = [[timesonline.co.uk]]
 |utgiver        = [[The Times]]
 |språk         = Engelsk
 |arkiv_url      = https://www.webcitation.org/5o58GkjYm?url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7004936.ece
 |arkivdato      = 2010-03-08
 |sitat          = The University of East Anglia breached the Freedom of Information Act by refusing to comply with requests for data concerning claims by its scientists that man-made emissions were causing global warming. […] The Information Commissioner’s Office decided that UEA failed in its duties under the Act but said that it could not prosecute those involved because the complaint was made too late, The Times has learnt.
 |forfatter      = Webster, Ben
 |url-status    = død 
}}</ref>

<ref name=BBC20091120>{{Cite news|title=Hackers target leading climate research unit|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8370282.stm|publisher=BBC News|date=2009-11-20|quote=The e-mail system of one of the world's leading climate research units has been breached by hackers.}}</ref>

<ref name="AP 21 Nov">{{Cite news|last=Stringer |first=David |title=Hackers leak e-mails, stoke climate debate |url=http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ikaqlFpp9jCRHWN0zNuamKXfyeMgD9C441LG0 |agency=[[The Associated Press]] |date=21. november 2009 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20091124195427/http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ikaqlFpp9jCRHWN0zNuamKXfyeMgD9C441LG0 |archivedate=2009-11-24 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

<ref name="WaPo 21 Nov">{{Cite news|last=Eilperin|first=Juliet|title=Hackers steal electronic data from top climate research center|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/20/AR2009112004093.html|work=[[The Washington Post]]|date=21. november 2009}}</ref>

<ref name="Guardian 20 Nov">{{Cite web
  |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/20/climate-sceptics-hackers-leaked-emails 
  |title=Climate sceptics claim leaked emails are evidence of collusion among scientists &#124; Environment 
  |publisher=The Guardian 
  |date= 2009-11-20
  |accessdate=2009-11-24
  |quote=In one email, dated November 1999, one scientist wrote: "I've just completed Mike's Nature [the science journal] trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."
}}</ref>

<ref name=guardian251109>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2009/nov/25/monbiot-climate-leak-crisis-response Pretending the climate email leak isn't a crisis won't make it go away]</ref>

<ref name="NYTimes 20 Nov">{{Cite news|last=Revkin|first=Andrew C.|title=Hacked E-Mail Is New Fodder for Climate Dispute|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/science/earth/21climate.html?_r=3|work=[[The New York Times]]|date=20. november 2009}}</ref>

<ref name=clivecrook1109>http://clivecrook.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/11/more_on_climategate.php Clive Crook More on Climategate One theme, in addition to those already mentioned about the suppression of dissent, the suppression of data and methods, and the suppression of the unvarnished truth, comes through especially strongly: plain statistical incompetence.</ref>

<ref name="2009-11-23_Telegraph">{{Cite news
  |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/6636563/University-of-East-Anglia-emails-the-most-contentious-quotes.html
  |title=University of East Anglia emails: the most contentious quotes
  |date=2009-11-23
  |publisher=The Daily Telegraph
  |accessdate=2009-11-25
  |quote=One of the emails under scrutiny, dated November 1999, reads: "I've just completed Mike's Nature [the science journal] trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."
  |archivedate=2009-11-26
  |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20091126180812/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/6636563/University-of-East-Anglia-emails-the-most-contentious-quotes.html
  |url-status=yes
  }}</ref>

<ref name="Telegraph">{{Cite web |author=Published: 8:00AM GMT 21 Nov 2009 |url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/6619796/Climate-scientists-accused-of-manipulating-global-warming-data.html |title=Climate scientists accused of 'manipulating global warming data' |publisher=Telegraph |date= |accessdate=2009-11-24 |archive-date=2009-11-24 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091124022835/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/6619796/Climate-scientists-accused-of-manipulating-global-warming-data.html |url-status=yes }}</ref>

<ref name= "NZ Herald 28 Nov">Gibson, Eloise;  [http://www.nzherald.co.nz/climate-change/news/article.cfm?c_id=26&objectid=10612165&pnum=0 "A climate scandal, or is it just hot air?"], ''[[New Zealand Herald]]'', 28 November 2009, accessed 8 December 2009.</ref>

<ref name="popularmechanics011209">[http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/earth/4338343.html?do=print What East Anglia's E-mails Really Tell Us About Climate Change] {{Wayback|url=http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/earth/4338343.html?do=print |date=20091205175454 }}, ''Popular Mechanics'', 1 December 2009, accessed 8 December 2009.</ref>

<ref name="wsj031209">[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703939404574567921682049840.html The Real Copenhagen Option], ''[[The Wall Street Journal]]'', 3 December 2009, accessed 8 December 2009.</ref>

<ref name="McMillan">{{Cite news
 |last        = McMillan
 |first       = Robert
 |title       = Global warming research exposed after hack
 |url         = http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9141258/Global_warming_research_exposed_after_hack?taxonomyId=82
 |work        = [[Computerworld]]
 |date        = 20. november 2009
 |accessdate  = 2009-11-26
 |archiveurl  = https://www.webcitation.org/5lYvpuNz1?url=http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9141258/Global_warming_research_exposed_after_hack?taxonomyId=82
 |archivedate = 2009-11-26
 |quote       = Judging from the data posted, the hack was done either by an insider or by someone inside the climate community who was familiar with the debate, said Robert Graham, CEO with the consultancy Errata Security. Whenever this type of incident occurs, "80 percent of the time it's an insider," he said.
 |url-status  = død
}}</ref>

<ref name=csm20091204pns>{{Kilde www
 |url            = http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/12/04/climategate-leaked-emails-push-scientists-toward-transparency/
 |tittel         = ‘Climategate’: leaked emails push scientists toward transparency
 |besøksdato    = 2009-12-05
 |forfatter      = Peter N. Spotts
 |medforfattere  = 
 |utgivelsesdato = 2009-12-04
 |utgiver        = [[The Christian Science Monitor]]
 |språk         = Engelsk
 |arkiv_url      = https://www.webcitation.org/5lmzg2kTf?url=http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/12/04/climategate-leaked-emails-push-scientists-toward-transparency/
 |arkivdato      = 2009-12-05
 |sitat          = The e-mails open a window onto a side of competitive scientific research the public seldom sees, including back-stabbing and politicking. [...] In one widely cited e-mail from CRU’s Dr. Jones to Dr. Mann, Jones verbally smacks down two research papers, then writes that he and a colleague will find a way to keep them out of the 2007 IPCC reports “even if we have to redefine what the peer-reviewed literature is.” (Both papers were ultimately cited and discussed in the IPCC reports.) The inclination to block other views, however, wasn’t limited to these scientists. [...] “The net result of this behavior is that a few deserving papers might not have gotten published or included in the IPCC assessment report,” says Judith Curry,
 |url-status    = død 
}}</ref>

<ref name=nyt20091128>{{Cite news|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/28/science/earth/28hack.html|title=Hacked E-Mail Data Prompts Calls for Changes in Climate Research |last=Revkin|first=Andrew C.|date=27. november 2009 |publisher=[[The New York Times]]|accessdate=28. november 2009| quote = A fierce debate over the significance of the hacked material erupted as soon as the e-mail messages and other documents surfaced on Web sites just over a week ago. Some see in the e-mail correspondence — which includes heated discussions about warming trends, advice on deleting potentially controversial e-mail messages and derisive comments about climate skeptics — evidence of a conspiracy to stifle dissenting views and withhold data from public scrutiny, or, as some have put it, “Climategate.”}}</ref>
<!--
<ref name=heraldsun20091205>[http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/bloggers-warm-to-the-theme-of-climategate-disclosure/story-e6frfifo-1225806808005 Andrew Bolt:Bloggers warm to the theme of Climategate disclosure]</ref>
-->
<ref name=tmes20091129>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece {{Wayback|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece |date=20091201184431 }} Climate change data dumped</ref>

<ref name=propagandamatrix200912>http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/december2009/120309_climategate_investigation.htm {{Wayback|url=http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/december2009/120309_climategate_investigation.htm |date=20100203060823 }} Rep. Miller Calls For Climategate Investigation Destruction of raw data to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests was "a criminal act," says Congresswoman Representative &ndash; Candice Miller has called for a Congressional investigation into the climategate scandal, saying that the deliberate destruction of data by scientists intimately involved in the UN IPCC in order to avoid FOIA requests was a "criminal act"" and blows away the whole foundation for the cap and trade legislation.</ref>

<ref name=youtube20091202>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0pRuhnFjas&feature=player_embedded# Rep. Miller on ClimateGate and Cap and Trade]</ref>

<ref name=psu2010203>{{Kilde www 
 |url=http://live.psu.edu/story/47378 
 |tittel=Investigation of climate scientist at Penn State complete 
 |besøksdato=2010-07-02 
 |utgivelsesdato=2010-07-01 
 |utgiver=[[Pennsylvania State University]] 
 |språk=Engelsk 
 |url-status=død 
 |arkivurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20100704105538/http://live.psu.edu/story/47378 
 |arkivdato=2010-07-04 
 }}

{{kilde www 
 |url=http://www.research.psu.edu/orp/Findings_Mann_Inquiry.pdf 
 |tittel=Arkivert kopi 
 |besøksdato=2010-02-07 
 |url-status=død 
 |arkivurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20100215071321/http://www.research.psu.edu/orp/Findings_Mann_Inquiry.pdf 
 |arkivdato=2010-02-15 
 }} RA-10 Inquiry Report: Concerning the Allegations of Research Misconduct Against Dr. Michael E. Mann, Department of Meteorology, College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University February 3, 2010.</ref>

<ref name="Reuters 23 Nov">{{Cite news|url=http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-GreenBusiness/idUSTRE5AM4AH20091123|title=Hacked climate e-mails awkward, not game changer|last=Gardner|first=Timothy|date=23. november 2009|work=Green Business|publisher=Reuters|accessdate=24. november 2009}}</ref>

<ref name="WSJ 23 Nov">{{Cite news|url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125883405294859215.html|title=Climate Emails Stoke Debate:Scientists' Leaked Correspondence Illustrates Bitter Feud over Global Warming|last=Johnson |first=Keith |date=23. november 2009 |work=U.S. NEWS |publisher=The Wall Street Journal|accessdate=24. november 2009}}</ref> 

<ref name="Moore 24 Nov">Moore, Matthew. [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/6637006/Climate-change-scientists-face-calls-for-public-inquiry-over-data-manipulation-claims.html Climate change scientists face calls for public inquiry over data manipulation claims] {{Wayback|url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/6637006/Climate-change-scientists-face-calls-for-public-inquiry-over-data-manipulation-claims.html |date=20091127050226 }}. ''The Telegraph'', 24 November 2009.</ref>

<ref name="Guardian 24 Nov">Hickman, Leo, "and agencies",  [http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/24/climate-professor-leaked-emails-uea "Climate scientist at centre of leaked email row dismisses conspiracy claims"], 24. november 2009, ''The Guardian''. Besøkt 25. november 2009.</ref>

<ref name="UEA 01 Dec">{{Cite web |url=https://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/nov/CRUupdate |title=CRU Update 1 December |publisher=[[University of East Anglia]] – Communications Office |date=1. desember 2009 |accessdate=2009-12-05 |archiveurl=https://www.webcitation.org/5lnKYt5cA?url=https://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/nov/CRUupdate |archivedate=2009-12-05 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

<ref name=wsjms>"[http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125902685372961609.html Lawmakers Probe Climate Emails]", ''[[The Wall Street Journal]]'', 24 November 2009.</ref>

<ref name="PI Dec 8">{{Cite news|title=Penn State scientist at center of a storm|url=http://www.sanluisobispo.com/528/story/948544.html|last=Flam|first=Faye|work=The Philadelphia Inquirer|date=2009-12-08}}{{død lenke|dato=juli 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot }}</ref>

<ref name=nytimes211109>[http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/11/24/24climatewire-stolen-e-mails-sharpen-a-brawl-between-clima-19517.html Stolen E-Mails Sharpen a Brawl Between Climate Scientists and Skeptics] - [[The New York Times]]</ref>

<ref name=Jansen_25112009>[http://www.bjerknes.uib.no/pages.asp?kat=113&id=1804&lang=1 Eystein Jansen: E-post-innbruddet ved University of East Anglia] {{Wayback|url=http://www.bjerknes.uib.no/pages.asp?kat=113&id=1804&lang=1 |date=20091201032509 }}; besøkt 16. april 2010</ref>

<ref name="kvalheim_skeptiker">[http://www.nettavisen.no/nyheter/article2763291.ece Nettavisen: – Klimaets Watergate-skandale] {{Wayback|url=http://www.nettavisen.no/nyheter/article2763291.ece |date=20100330010912 }}: «Kvalheim legger ikke skjul på at han er en stor skeptiker av menneskeskapte klimaendringer. – Jeg er jo helt klar på at ut fra min erfaring og analyse er betydningen av CO2 veldig overdrevet, sier han.»; publisert 23. november 2009, besøkt 16. april 2010.</ref> 
<ref name=NYT20100711>{{Cite news
  |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/11/opinion/11sun2.html?_r=2
  |title=A Climate Change Corrective
  |date=2010-07-11
  |publisher=The New York Times
  |accessdate=2010-08-26
  |quote= Perhaps now we can put the manufactured controversy known as Climategate behind us and turn to the task of actually doing something about global warming.
 }}</ref>

<ref name=Newsweek20100625>{{Cite news
  |url=http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/the-gaggle/2010/06/25/newspapers-retract-climategate-claims-but-damage-still-done.html
  |title=Newspapers Retract 'Climategate' Claims, but Damage Still Done
  |date=2010-06-25
  |publisher=Newsweek
  |accessdate=2010-08-26
  |quote= In that highly orchestrated, manufactured scandal, e-mails hacked from computers at the University of East Anglia’s climate-research group were spread around the Web by activists who deny that human activity is altering the world’s climate in a dangerous way, and spun so as to suggest that the scientists had been lying, cheating, and generally cooking the books.
 }}</ref>

<ref name=WSJ20100716>{{Cite news
  |url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703394204575367483847033948.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
  |title=A Climate Absolution? The alarmists still won't separate science from politics. 
  |date=2010-07-16
  |publisher=The Wall Street Journal
  |accessdate=2010-08-26
  |quote= Which makes it all the more unfortunate that last week's "Independent Climate Change Email Review," commissioned and funded by the University of East Anglia and chaired by Muir Russell, the former Vice Chancellor of the University of Glasgow, amounts to a 160-page evasion of the real issues.
 }}</ref>

<ref name=Monbiot20100707>{{Kilde www
  |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2010/jul/07/russell-inquiry-i-was-wrong
  |tittel=The 'climategate' inquiry at last vindicates Phil Jones – and so must I 
  |dato=2010-07-07
  |utgiver=The  Guardian
  |besøksdato=2010-08-26
  |sitat= I think, in the light of everything I've now seen and read, that if I were to write that article again I'd conclude that Phil Jones should hang on – but only just.
 }}</ref>

</references>