“Climategate” scientist contemplated suicide
Posted By admin on February 8, 2010
The scientist at the centre of the “climategate” scandal says he
contemplated suicide after leaked e-mails were seized on by sceptics.
In an interview with the Sunday Times, Professor Phil Jones also said
he had been provoked into sending the e-mails.
It was claimed the e-mails, leaked after a University of East Anglia
server was hacked into, showed data was being manipulated.
Prof Jones, 57, said he had received death threats over the incident.
He told the newspaper: “I did think about it, yes. About suicide. I
thought about it several times, but I think I’ve got past that stage
now.”
He agreed it became his “David Kelly moment” – a reference to the
scientist who killed himself in the aftermath of the “sexed up” Iraq
intelligence dossier claims.
Professor Jones, 57, also said he received death threats in the
aftermath of the scandal.
“People said I should go kill myself. They said they knew where I
lived.”
The row erupted last December when hundreds of messages between
scientists at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit
(CRU) and their peers around the world were put on the internet along
with other documents.
Some allege one of e-mails suggested Professor Jones – then head of the
CRU – wanted certain papers excluded from the UN’s next major
assessment of climate science.
He strenuously denies this was his intention and says other e-mails
have been taken out of context.
Critics of the scientific consensus have claimed that the e-mails
undermine the case that greenhouse gas emissions from human activities
are causing global warming.
In the interview, Prof Jones acknowledged that he had not dealt with
requests for data in “the right way”.
But he added he was provoked by those obstructing his work into writing
messages that his detractors claim called on colleagues to destroy or
withdraw information.
“It was just frustration. I thought the requests were just
distractions. It was taking us away from our day jobs. It was written
in anger,” he said.
“I am obviously going to be much more careful about my e-mails in
future. I will write every e-mail as if it is for publication.
“But I stand 100% behind the science. I did not manipulate or fabricate
any data and I look forward to proving that.”
Comments