Feb
Inquirygate: Official British Climategate e-mail review falling apart
contributed by John O’Sullivan
The so-called ‘Independent Climate Change Email Inquiry’ is unraveling faster than the man made global warming myth itself.
Within just a few days of its launch, this travesty has already been exposed as a sham. At least three of the five original panel members were found to be in cahoots with the warmist lobby on a rudderless ship skippered by hapless former University of Glasgow principal, Sir Muir Russell.
At the time of publishing this article two of the original crew members have jumped ship – last Thursday it was Dr Philip Campbell, this weekend rumour has it Professor Geoffrey Boulton.. Who else will bail out?
An increasingly skeptic British press have quickly assailed the high moral ground to cast their eyes upon what may soon become the wreck of Sir Russell’s review.
The demise of Professor Boulton was instigated after an article appeared in Friday’s ‘The Scotsman,’ a respected national newspaper that broadsided Boulton for signing a petition to show his great confidence that global warming was caused by human-caused carbon dioxide emissions.
But it gets worse because for 18 years Boulton worked at the University of East Anglia (UEA). In an article for Edinburgh University, Boulton fatefully wrote:
“The argument regarding climate change is over.”
James Delingpole in Friday’s ‘Telegraph’ exposed what is fast turning into an almighty public relations shambles.
The respected climate commentator advises us we need look no further than the Inquiry’s own website to witness the lies upon which this whitewash job has been built:
The Muir Russell FAQ states:
“Do any of the Review team members have a predetermined view on climate change and climate science?
No. Members of the research team come from a variety of scientific backgrounds. They were selected on the basis they have no prejudicial interest in climate change and climate science and for the contribution they can make to the issues the Review is looking at.”
As famed Canadian climate analyst, Steve McIntyre, the unpaid blogger who precipitated the Climategate scandal by his Freedom of Information requests, points out:
“There are thousands of people in the world who are qualified to serve on this inquiry who have never met Jones, Briffa and/or Mitchell; who haven’t worked for 18 years at the University of East Anglia and who aren’t currently active in climate change policy advocacy – people who meet Muir Russell’s criteria of having “no prejudicial interest in climate change and climate science”
Thus, we may infer from the Inquiry’s Great Lie that there will be no truth or objectivity here for British taxpayers. It’s plain to see now that these woeful whitewashers are handpicked lackies of a discredited and rotten British Labour Government hard set to be scuttled in the upcoming spring general election.
But the sharks of scuttlebutt will now earnestly start circling their third target, David Eyton, who is BP’s group vice president of Research & Technology. Eyton is on record as being very much on board the warmist fleet while BP has been shamelessly funding the law-breaking University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit for several years. Eyton is reported to have said:
“The challenge of climate change requires policy development at all levels: global, national and local. Our work with Princeton is an example of BP’s commitment to collaborative research, and has already provided a vital contribution to the pace of policy development. We trust that governments will be successful in reaching a consensus for significant action, and we are working to inform their actions based on our experience of low-carbon technologies and businesses.”
Yet again, these are hardly the words of an impartial judge. By the Inquiry’s own criteria the VP of a multi-billion dollar ‘big oil’ company investing heavily in ‘low-carbon’ technology and dependent on government subsidies, cannot qualify as a panel member who has no “predetermined view on climate change and climate science.”
Why must we be continually treated to so much flotsam and jetsam? The captain is navigating the wrong course and the ship’s passengers–the British people–are about ready to mutiny.
Pointedly, opinion polls in all English-speaking nations show the masses ebbing away from the man made global warming junket. The tide has turned against politicians who sail with that global warming ill wind.
Christopher Pearson puts it most eloquently in the ‘Australian’:
“What we are witnessing, in defiance of officialdom, government propaganda and the bulk of funded researchers in the field, is the collapse of a scientific paradigm. This is something that has never happened before. Politically speaking, it’s a game-changer with the potential to overturn the normative assumptions commentators rely on.”
Just like the former British Chancellor of Exchequer, Lord Lawson, said, we too condemn the decision that this rag-tag review be held in private. In light of the above, that will not do.
UPDATE: Sir Muir Russell will not replace biased global warmist, Professor Geoffrey Boulton.
John O’Sullivan is a legal advocate and writer who for several years has litigated in government corruption and conspiracy cases in both the US and Britain. Visit his website. He offers his services free to the site and is not a site employee. Any opinions he expresses are his own and do not necessarily represent those of the site owner.
Possibly related posts:
- Top climatologist finds 40% of British government climate costs report “fraudulent”
- Climategate inquiry under way
- Phil Jones on witness stand before the UK Parliamentary Inquiry on Climategate
- Penn State’s inquiry into Michael Mann advances to an investigation
- Former student claims Climategate University ‘often’ falsified data
This is so very heartening that the people have begun to understand how much dishonesty their governments have been dishing out to them, how utterly despicable the politicians we elected to serve our interests have behaved.People have begun to question muc more than they ever did and this is one of the main benefits of ths outing of these emails and the consequent development being bestowed on the world for a stronger democracy.No more complacency-no BLIND FAITH in these crooked governments who must be scrutinised continuously.I do believe this will a world-wide phenomena.
You say that Boulton has also jumped ship. If so, that’s big news. Evidence? First I’ve heard of it.
John asked me to add rumored to have quit while he checks his sources. Thanks.
Quite agree Rob.
I have looked on the Scotman’s site. Can’t find anything there.
There is no sign of this on any other sites
We will see what Monday morning brings.
All climate scientists are (or should be) skeptics.
We are continually being told that the science is “robust” so
let the inquiry team be made up of all skeptics !!
Peer-review has been given a bad name: so many of the participants having reviewed each others work or ‘nodded papers through’. We have been lied to repeatedly and I have lost track of the number of …gates we have had over the past few weeks !
True open debate has not been allowed (as the warmists have run away and hidden behind empty ‘settled’ statements).
A full peer-review undertaken through the process of an inquiry would be more open and transparent than anything that has gone before.
Profs Ball, Christy & Lindzen would be my qualified dream-team with
McIntyre & McKitrick as witnesses.
I do not see how ANY inquiry can arrive at an acceptable outcome
to the British people (or the rest of the world) unless the panel are all ‘devil’s advocates’.
If the science is truly robust it must withstand full scrutiny or fail – that is the scientific way – or has this been sacrificed in favour of the lure of riches, global power and influence ? …. I suspect it has.
Go on – prove me wrong Sir.
Well written comments, again. Gordan Brown’s most recent statements are not encouraging, although someone pointedly suggested his degree from Glasgow was not exactly science based!
Whatever his degree, Gormless Brown is so far removed from reality he probably believes the sun rises in the west.
Gordan Brown? Do you imagine he on the outside of this scam?
If Boulton hasn’t already jumped ship can you really imagine Russell letting him continue after this ?
Might have been a better idea for this to have come out after the inquiry had started. Really put the cat amongst the pigeons. They would have had to re-start with a new panel or be known as sitting as biased with a pre-determined result in mind (as if they’re not anyway).
And as for Brown – is it not his government who are offering research grants “…to find evidence of MMGW or MMCC”. Who’s going to look for, and report, conflicting evidence with their livelyhood at stake.
The enquiry is rapidly falling apart – see Climate Audit and Bishop Hill this morning. There’s an important story here. But Boulton hasn’t (yet) “jumped ship” and it destroys the credibility of your blog to keep saying so, despite your comment at 12:24 yesterday.
My reference (previous post) to “this morning” refers to the UK.
“Allegations of bias against Review member rejected”
see Independent Climate Change em@il Review at http://www.cce-review.org/News.php
This band of Whitewash Wizards have begun to unband even before they can do any more harm is excellent news.Climate-Science-Fiction will now be recognised as such and the backers as Climate-Fictionalists.
Think for a moment “Climate Change” ruse has brought so many changes in many other spheres of our understanding how the World works and what part the crooks and the fraudsters play in it and how they have positioned themselves to benefit themselves and their cohorts to the exclusion of most of Humankind.
Any entity connected to the UN must be looked upon with extreme suspicion for it is obvious the UN CAN BE and HAS BEEN MOULDED to benefit very few and to harm many.