Thanks for running this past me before publication. There are a few incorrect details plus a couple of omissions which I’ll address below. I have also added a short personal statement. – Thanks.
1) Your full name is Roger Tattersalll
- Two ll’s at the end, not three.
2) you are trained as an engineer.
- yes, and I also hold a BA(hons) in History and Philosophy of Science
3) you have worked part time as a digital content manager at the University of Leeds.
- Hopefully I will continue to . My official job title is ‘web content editor’ You can confirm this from the Leeds University website.
4) you also work as a internet security consultant. – Not since the accident which broke my spine 5 years ago, leading to the winding up of my sole trader limited company. I haven’t changed my website in years – use the wayback machine to check this is true.
5) You deny being FOIA
- I don’t need to because I haven’t been accused of anything. The police have confirmed in email that I am not suspected of any crime. Having been made aware of this, I sincerely hope you will make this clear in your article, and avoid any ambiguity which might lead to mistaken assumptions to the contrary on the part of your readership. I am cc’ing this email to my attorney so he can witness this request.
6) your online name is tallbloke
No arrest was made, the police only wished to clone the disks of my computers. They came at 6.45pm not midnight as Stephen Wilde stated mistakenly. The police said at the time they do not suspect me of any crime, and have since confirmed this in email. They are returning the computers today.
The DOJ request to Automattic inc who own wordpress asked them to hold logs on their wordpress servers in California for the three days around the placing of the comment by ‘FOIA’, for 90 days. Automattic passed copies of the DOJ request to the three bloggers concerned merely as a courtesy, there was no requirement for them to do so, and there was no request by the DOJ for us to save anything on our home pc’s, which could not possibly contain any logs or data relating to the ‘FOIA’ comment anyway.
I am an upright citizen who has studied the science and social aspects of ‘global warming’ for the last five years as a spare time activity since a serious accident left me unable to pursue my previously more active lifestyle as a mountaineer and motorcyclist. Two years ago I made a discovery concerning solar system dynamics which leads me to believe that changes in planetary surface temperatures partly involve long term and shorter term cyclic phenomena related to the changing disposition of solar system masses and their electromagnetic activity. I started my blog in the hope of attracting other people with similar interests to discuss these issues. It has since additionally hosted guest posts by other authors on the wider issues around ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’. It is now one of the more popular websites on the subject, where people can debate the issues in a civilised and respectful way.
Roger ‘tallbloke’ Tattersall
BA(hons) Hist/Phil Sci
Kaufman, Leslie wrote:
> Just checking before I publish. Let me know if any of the following are incorrect.
> 1) Your full name is Roger Tattersalll
> 2) you are trained as an engineer.
> 3) you have worked part time as a digital content manager at the University of Leeds.
> 4) you also work as a internet security consultant.
> 5) You deny being FOIA
> 6) your online name is tallbloke
> Leslie Kaufman
> National Environment Reporter
> /The New York Times/
> *From:* Rog Tallbloke
> *Sent:* Friday, December 16, 2011 4:48 PM
> *To:* Kaufman, Leslie
> *Cc:* Stephen Wilde
> *Subject:* Fw: press release
> My client is an honest and open minded climate enthusiast who has come to the personal conclusion that the consensus view of the climate effect of human emissions does not match observations or his understanding of the relevant physical processes.
> In an effort to understand the reasons for the apparent discrepancy my client set up an enthusiast’s website purely for the benefit of like minded individuals to discuss such matters amongst themselves with the participation of those members of the public who shared such interests.
> It seems that as a result of the high profile earned by our client the person or persons known as ‘FOIA’ selected our client amongst others as a recipient of a link to an internet site which contained details of emails that were clearly in the public interest by virtue of their relevance to the wisdom of certain global policy decisions relating to energy use, energy supply and possibly global rationing of energy sources and the direct or indirect taxation of every individual on the planet for the foreseeable future.
> As an honest and upstanding citizen our client has always been willing to support the authorities in any reasonable investigation and, if asked, would never have objected to assisting those authorities in examining his computer equipment to ascertain whether any help could be provided in tracing the source of the said emails or the identity of ‘FOIA’.
> The entire exercise as regards our client was wholly unnecessary and counterproductive.
> Our client reserves his position as regards future actions in relation to the abuse which he has endured.