Punching Stupid and Evil in the Face Since 1986!

"We are on strike, we the men of the mind. We are on strike against self-immolation. We are on strike against the creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties."-John Galt

Thursday, July 15, 2010

ClimateGate: We investigated ourselves and we are innocent

There seems to be a trend these days in declaring one's self innocent. No longer should we bother with an investigation by our peers-or the law-nor should we have others investigate us. Just like the White House did a few months back, the researchers involved in ClimateGate investigated and testified to the validity of their data and found they were guilty of no wrong doing.
"The British scientists involved in a controversial scandal over global warming are cleared of any dishonesty," Lisa Sylvester stated on CNN July 7. She went on to say that the "independent" report found that scientists "did not exaggerate threats of global warming as critics alleged."

The July 8 Washington Post also reported the "independent commission," but without mentioning who commissioned the report. A Chicago Tribune editorialist even used the Muir Russell report to claim that ClimateGate itself was "something of a hoax."

The Post and many other outlets didn't mention crucial indications that the so-called "independent" investigations were a "whitewash." Cato Institute Senior Fellow Pat Michaels wrote an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal July 12 cautioning people, "Don't believe the ‘independent' reviews."

Michaels, who was a professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia (UVA) from 1980 to 2007, pointed out that Muir Russell's panel named "The Independent Climate Change E-mails Review" was in fact "commissioned and paid for by the University of East Anglia (UEA), the same university whose climate department was under investigation."

That would be like BP handpicking and paying a panel of experts to investigate its handling of the oil spill. Would the news media take that panel seriously if it "exonerated" BP? Not likely.

But according to Michaels and others that wasn't the only problem with the review panel.

"Mr. Russell took pains to present his committee, which consisted of four other academics, as independent," Michaels explained. "He told the Times of London that ‘Given the nature of the allegations it is right that someone who has no links to either the university or the climate science community looks at the evidence and makes recommendations based on what they find.'"

But there were actually strong links between the reviewers and UEA. Michaels noted that one of the panelists, Prof. Geoffrey Boulton, had been on the faculty of UEA's School of Environmental Science and CRU - the division accused of impropriety was established at the beginning of his tenure.
The best part is, it changes nothing. The American people have seen through this sham and will no longer put any weight behind these claims of cataclysmic Global Warming that signals the end of life as we know it. The data was manipulated and everyone knows it. These scientists should hang their heads in shame and go away.

Here's how they are reporting it in the MSM:

That's so cute. They just can't stand it can they.