More On Those Aussie “Death Threat” Emails

Australia Climate Madness has the details

The ANU on Tuesday agreed to release the 11 emails which were the subject of my FOI request, redacted to maintain the privacy of the individuals concerned. LINK

Seven out of the eleven documents contain no threats, and at worst contain mild abuse -these are documents 1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10 and 11.

Three of the other four are crank emails. Then there is this

One document contains a report of an alleged threat of violence which I discuss below. This was dated June 2010, well outside the six-month scope of the FoI request. By the way, that period was chosen because the news reports stated that the threats had been going on for six months, but had increased in the last few weeks (see later). It states (in full):

I’ll let you head on over to read it, bit it appears to me as if the ANU climate scientist is cutting and pasting a portion of an email from another source, and we don’t have the original email it supposedly came from. And we all know that Warmists never make things up (I’d usually include a raftload of links, however, writing this with my Droid.)

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “More On Those Aussie “Death Threat” Emails”

  1. […] Pirate’s Cove: More On Those Aussie “Death Threat” Emails […]

  2. gitarcarver says:

    I am assuming you dl’ed the packet and read the emails.

    All I can say is this is one of the strangest things I have ever seen in my life.

    There is not a single one of the emails that can be seen as a threat, much less a death threat.

    There is some non-civility on the emails, but that is a long way from being a “threat.”

    There is not a single, rational thinking person who would see the emails as a “threat.” Even the story about the guy “bragging about being a sniper” is fabricated from an incident that is way out of context.

    We can argue and discuss the “science” of AGW because much of the “science” is speculative in nature. Here, with these emails, you have the AGW folks, backed by the ABC lying – demonstrably lying – about these alleged “threats.”

    If they are willing to lie about something like this, their truthfulness in all issues and statements are in question.

    Truly, this is a despicable set of actions by the AGW crowd.

  3. Yeah, I downloaded and read them and you are so right, they essentially are nothing.

Pirate's Cove