The timesonline article actually says the original data (after being analyzed) was dumped to save space when moving to another building.
"Jones was not in charge of the CRU when the data were thrown away in the 1980s, a time when climate change was seen as a less pressing issue. The lost material was used to build the databases that have been his life?s work, showing how the world has warmed by 0.8C over the past 157 years."
There was nothing there to indicate that data was dumped to alter results.
Roger Pielke, who requested the original data, is apparantly not a global warming naysayer:
Pielke has a somewhat nuanced position on climate change, which is sometimes taken for skepticism, a label that he explicitly renounces. He has said:
the evidence of a human fingerprint on the global and regional climate is incontrovertible as clearly illustrated in the National Research Council report and in our research papers (e.g. see http://climatesci.org/publications/pdf/R-258.pdf).
The Telegraph piece is an op-ed by a history-major journalist with a history of his own:
Via his long-running column in the UK's Sunday Telegraph, Booker has claimed that man-made global warming was "disproved" in 2008, that white asbestos is "chemically identical to talcum powder" and poses a "non-existent risk" to human health, that "scientific evidence to support [the] belief that inhaling other people's smoke causes cancer simply does not exist" and that there is "no proof that BSE causes CJD in humans". He has also defended the theory of Intelligent Design, maintaining that Darwinians "rest their case on nothing more than blind faith and unexamined a priori assumptions".
The bottom line is that the same recommendations to slow carbon dioxide emissions are good to curtail the pollution that nearly everyone agrees is not good, reduce dependence on foreign energy sources, and allow the earth's natural resources last longer.