Michale E. Mann, Asst Professor, U-Mass lays out the conspiracy;
"I am grateful to Peck for realizing that the time is ripe for a workshop in which we all strategize as a group towards these ends. I believe we all go into this in "good faith", and I'm very excited about what the workshop might produce, in particular, in terms of effective long-term strategies [funding]." http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=66&filename=906042912.txt
Here, Keith Briffa is trying to stay employed: http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=68&filename=906137836.txt He seems a in a bit of a panic, funny..
This is good, Naki (Nebojsa Nakicenovic) figures out he can reset all of the CO2 modeler's data to a single starting point for 2009. Screw all that data you used before!
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=71&filename=907293443.txt
Michael Prather (http://www.ess.uci.edu/~prather/) lays it all out right here: "So we will do as already stated 'make emissions match [temperature] observations'." http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=73&filename=907525054.txt Mike goes on to say "The AOGCMs [Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation Model] should NOT use their own sulfur cycle for the first of the climate scenarios. There is little doubt that all will produce vastly different negative RFs and hence different regional climate response. As I remember listening to the arguments for preparing these climate scenarios, the PRIMARY goal
is to assess how well/consistently we can predict future climate and especially regional changes given a set of forcings. Likewise, we do not want these scenarios generated from different time lines for CO2"
Ahh, Keith doesn't let me down, fixing the data to fit what he wants...
http://www.eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=75&filename=907695513.txt Overpeck [Peck] adds here: "it is interesting that the 20th century is as warm or warmer than everything in the last 1000 years EXCEPT before ca. 1110 AD." Then he questions the data, sounding like it should be discounted.
