LONDON – A British university embroiled in an e-mail row ordered a review yesterday of its climate researchers’ work after accusations that they distorted or hid evidence to support the case for man-made global warming.
The University of East Anglia said external investigators would check papers published by its Climatic Research Unit, one of the world’s leading sources of data on changing temperatures.
The centre, which has contributed to UN climate reports, is already under investigation after hackers broke into its network and stole e-mails critics cite as evidence that scientists manipulated, suppressed and hyped climate data. More than 1,000 leaked e-mails were put on the internet last November, leading to a police investigation into who stole them and doubts about climate science’s accuracy and reliability.
Britain’s most senior climate scientists say the row has dented public confidence in the evidence that underpins man’s role in raising global temperatures to dangerous levels. “It is in the interests of all concerned that there should be an additional assessment considering the science itself,” Prof Trevor Davies, the university’s pro-vice chancellor for research, said in a statement.
The Royal Society, Britain’s national academy of science, said it would help find external reviewers to work on the case. “It is important that people have the utmost confidence in the science of climate change,” said the society’s president, Martin Rees.
Another team of scientists, funded by the university, will investigate the research centre’s working practices, handling of data and its response to requests made under Britain’s freedom of information laws.
Chairman Sir Muir Russell, a former government bureaucrat, said his team must decide which of “tens of thousands” of e-mails they will have to check in a review due to report in spring.
Climate sceptics are unconvinced of a link between man-made carbon emissions and rising temperatures. However, scientists say there is overwhelming scientific data from scores of sources which support their argument.