For the third consecutive time, the climate investigators at University of East Anglia have been cleared of wrongdoing in their presentation of climate data, in spite of some overblown appearances in leaked emails, the so-called "ClimateGate."
The possibility of catching proponents of global climate change theory in academic dishonesty has made turned even the most flaccid conservative into blue steel over what has turned out to be much ado about nothing. Seriously, this was better than Viagra™ for all the Lindsey Grahams, James Inhofes, Myron Ebells and the Telegraph UKs of the world.
The Muir Russell Report has been the most exhaustive and explicit exoneration of the three investigations that have occurred so far. The only issue the report really has with the scientists is the issue of openness in terms of the transparency of their processes.
Although that's not nearly as sexy or headline grabbing as the Wingnut-0-Sphere wanted to make out of what were essentially stolen emails, the issues of scientific openness in the age of expanded research are not trivial and will have to be addressed by the Earth science community as a whole.
The good folks over at RealClimate have a pretty good read on both the political and scientific issues involved.
So... all done then right?
Oh, I see you've been reading the mojowire for some time now, so you know better...
The appearance of Muir Russell has done nothing but confirm to the flat-earthers that the conspiracy is truly far reaching and that the dirty fzcking scientists will stop at nothing to push their lies down all our throats in the name of their anti-American, God-hating, secular humanist agenda...
As Gerald Warner, top Etonian blogger tool at the Telegraph UK tells us:
But the most startling development was partially revealed at the tail-end of Hulme’s remarks, when he warned that greater openness would not ensure an easier time for climate scientists in future. He said this was because a new generation of more sophisticated computer models is not reducing the uncertainties in predicting future climate, but rather the reverse. “This is not what the public and politicians expect, so handling and explaining this will be difficult.”
Too right it will. Despite the known proclivity of computer models to come up with the findings they have been programmed to produce, Hulme is conceding that more sophisticated versions are refusing to record the desired result, but in fact the reverse. If even the alarmists’ own tame technology, due to improved accuracy, is refusing to comply with their wish list of global warming symptoms, then the game is well and truly up. Meanwhile, before confronting these awkward realities, it is time to sit back and admire Sir Muir Russell’s brushwork with a bucket of whitewash.
Well, no that's not really what Hulme said about openness, but then what do expect from yet another flat-earther.
But really, this kind of denial is tame compared to the likes of Senator Inhofe who has repeatedly called out global climate change as a scam and a conspiracy of biblical proportions, or claims that the oil companies and the Scottish government some how have a vested interest in anthropomorphic climate change.
So while I am glad the UEA folks' scientific "rigour and honesty" are in tact, I don't expect fence sitters to read this report and change their minds, much less the wingnuts and asshats.
Iin a scandal like this, exoneration is a pyrrhic victory. The damage is done. Most people now when warned about the dangers of climate change and why we, as a society need to start addressing this (and are probably over late in doing so), the thought will not be "wow, this is serious..."
No, it the predominant idea will be "climate change, isn't that a crazy theory and that fake scientists are just making up shit about it?"
mojo sends
