Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLantern
My Supervisor did his PHD under the fellers under question with the whole Climategate thing. He is a very good scientist in the sense that he can view things objectively. But I still feel he has a little bias when defending them. He did make one good point though.
Say you had access to two years worth of emails. And you went through these emails with the intent of looking for incriminating evidence, I think that based on the emails as a whole, you could find a number of different series that would look bad to outside eyes. My supervisor himself admits the fact that if someone was to grab two days worth of a conversation that had been on going for a month, well hell that could look pretty bad. All the way from joking (?) death threats about someone who cut your funding with a colleague to hey lets try this, then the reply being No we can't because of this.. well maybe that reply never gets posted included in this "series".
But if you actually take a step back and look at the picture as a whole, things make a lot more sense. In other words, you look at it objectively.
|
A response I would expect. However, the joys of email threads are the ability to capture the whole conversation and there are alot of those types of emails posted and available. And they contain context and aren't little snippets from a single email.