Claim: An independent inquiry found CRU is a small research unit with limited resources and their rigour and honesty are not in doubt.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: The Science and Technology Select Committee inquiry reported on 31 March 2010 that it had found that "the scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact".

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: Describing its report as "hugely positive", he stated that "it is especially important that, despite a deluge of allegations and smears against the CRU, this independent group of utterly reputable scientists have concluded that there was no evidence of any scientific malpractice."

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: The "rigour and honesty" of the scientists at the Climatic Research Unit were found not to be in doubt.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 1
Passage: The panel did not seek to evaluate the science itself, but rather whether "the conclusions [reached by the CRU] represented an honest and scientifically justified interpretation of the data".

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The Climatic Research Unit (CRU) is a component of the University of East Anglia and is one of the leading institutions concerned with the study of natural and anthropogenic climate change.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: Cru is ``a vineyard or group of vineyards, especially one of recognized quality''.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The Climatic Research Unit email controversy (also known as ``Climategate'') began in November 2009 with the hacking of a server at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) by an external attacker, copying thousands of emails and computer files, the Climatic Research Unit documents, to various internet locations several weeks before the Copenhagen Summit on climate change.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The CRU was found to be "objective and dispassionate in their view of the data and their results, and there was no hint of tailoring results to a particular agenda.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: In addition, the investigation would review CRU's compliance with Freedom of Information Act requests and also "make recommendations about the management, governance and security structures for CRU and the security, integrity and release of the data it holds".

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The Climatic Research Unit email controversy (also known as "Climategate") began in November 2009 with the hacking of a server at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) by an external attacker, copying thousands of emails and computer files, the Climatic Research Unit documents, to various internet locations several weeks before the Copenhagen Summit on climate change.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: The CRU collates data from many sources around the world.

Relevance (1 = gold evidence, 0 = mined hard negative): 0
Passage: CRUs, an abbreviation of Civil Resettlement Units