《b宫东风精讲英语37(2011年12月5日周一)——43(2011年11月29日周二)翻译》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《b宫东风精讲英语37(2011年12月5日周一)——43(2011年11月29日周二)翻译（9页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、宫东风精讲英语37（2011年11月29日周二）宫东风精讲英语38（2011年11月30日周三）请反复阅读并翻译下列文章。Climategate scientists DID collude with government officials to hide research that didnt fit their apocalyptic global warmingMore than 5,000 documents have been leaked online purporting to be the correspondence of climate scientists at the
2、 University of East Anglia who were previously accused of massaging evidence of man-made climate change.Following on from the original climategate emails of 2009, the new package appears to show systematic suppression of evidence, and even publication of reports that scientists knew to to be based o
3、n flawed approaches.And not only do the emails paint a picture of scientists manipulating data, government employees at the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) are also implicated.One message appeared to show a member of Defra staff telling colleagues working on climate sc
4、ience to give the government a strong message.The emails paint a clear picture of scientists selectively using data, and colluding with politicians to misuse scientific information.Humphrey, said to work at Defra, writes: I cannot overstate the HUGE amount of political interest in the project as a m
5、essage that the government can give on climate change to help them tell their story.They want their story to be a very strong one and dont want to be made to look foolish.Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit at the centre of the affair, said the group findings did stand up to
6、 scrutiny.Yet one of the newly released emails, written by Prof. Jones - who is working with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)- said: Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get and has to be well hidden.Ive discussed this wit
7、h the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.In another of his emails, he wrote: Ive been told that Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is above national Freedom of Information Acts.One way to cover yourself and all those
8、working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process.Other scientists are clearly against such a policy, but some seemed happy to collude with concealing and destroying evidence.One nervous scientist wrote: The figure you sent is very deceptive.I also think the science is being man
9、ipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run, wrote another.The lead author of one of the reports,Jonathan Overpeck, wrote, The trick may be to decide on the main message and use that to guide whatsincluded and what is left out.A weak perform
10、ance by Environment Secretary Chris Huhne on Question Time has helped to inflame the row over the second leak of private UEA emails - now described as Climategate 2.0.Former Chancellor Nigel Lawsons Global Warming Policy Foundation warned against ignoring shortcomings in a letter strongly critical o
11、f the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.It said: The BBC, in determining its policy towards the coverage of global warming, which is of course not simply a scientific issue but an economic and a political issue, too, ought to shred that section of the Jones review and revert to the impartial
12、ity laid down in its charter.He was also strongly critical of sections of the media who lent support to the scientists.Andrew Orlwowski, UK science site The Registers science correspondent comments on one email that says, What if climate change turns out to be a natural fluctuation? Theyll kill us a
13、llOrlowski says, That wont be necessary.Clive Crook, a commentator for the Atlantic, who described the earlier inquiries into the Climategate emails as ineffectual and mealy mouthed, reportedly said,The closed-mindedness of these supposed men of science, their willingness to go to any lengths to def
14、end a preconceived message, is surprising even to me.The stink of intellectual corruption is overpowering.There is other correspondence from scientists such as Prof Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Centre at Penn State University, some of which have a distinct feel of PR spin.The r
15、elease of the information echoes the Climategate leaks of hacked private emails two years ago ahead of crunch climate talks in Copenhagen that referred to ways to hide the decline in global warming.A series of independent reviews cleared the East Anglia researchers of impropriety, but they were told
16、 they had been too secretive.Todays leak may also be timed to disrupt the next session of the UNs Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change next week in South Africa.The emails have been released in the form of quotes carefully chosen to show bias, or that scientists were pursuing a particular agenda in their research.The unnamed individuals who released
