Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Good news on the Climate Bill

Here's Politico, reporting on some good news about the Climate Bill, also known as "the convenient excuse for a tax increase and a massive power grab":

The Senate climate bill has been at death’s door several times over the past year. But with the days before the August recess quickly slipping away, the case may truly be terminal now.

Hit the link to read the whole thing.  And then from The Washington Examiner, here's a post-mortem on the whitewash of the Climategate scandal:

When the Climategate e-mails were released last year, the evidence of misconduct by the scientists involved was so strong that the climate establishment was forced to commission a series of tribunals. Yet the conclusions of those inquiries are as specious as the science they were supposed to investigate. By asking the wrong questions -- or not asking them at all -- they have failed to advance the climate debate one iota. 

....This panel did not examine the other e-mails on the CRU server, as it was supposed to do. It cleared the scientists of perverting the peer review process simply because their efforts did not succeed, thereby ignoring their clear intent as expressed in the e-mails.

Further, the inquiry failed to ask the most basic questions of the CRU scientists, such as whether Professor Phil Jones had actually deleted inconvenient e-mails. Britain's freedom of information office said that the Cimategate e-mails provided the most cogent evidence imaginable that there had been efforts to avoid FOI requirements, yet the Muir Russell review did not investigate this appropriately.

Even this inadequate investigation, however, found that the way the hockey stick graph was handled was misleading. Imagine what it -- and the parliamentary committee -- would have found if there had been some witnesses for the prosecution.

Those who hope that these inquiries exonerate global warming science are engaging in wishful thinking. The Climategate e-mails are still there for all to read and the questions they raise remain unanswered. Until there are answers, Climategate rolls on. 

1 comment:

Cedric Katesby said...

And then from The Washington Examiner, here's a post-mortem on the whitewash of the Climategate scandal

Yet another newspaper?

Who wrote the "post-mortem"?
Look a little closer.
The author is an Examiner Staff writer called Iain Murray.

Does Iain Murray wear any other hats by any chance?
Well, way down at the bottom it says:

Iain Murray is a vice president at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

The who?
The Competitive Enterprise Institute?
What sort of a place is that?

(google is your friend)

What do they do?
Is there any reason why anybody should listen to this particular "Institute" on issues of science?

Trusting Institutes is not a good idea.
Literally anybody can cook up an Institute to create a facade of respectability.