WHAT DOES THE MEDIA TREAT US LIKE LITTLE KIDS WHO NEED TO JUST TRUST WHAT THE TEACHER SAYS? MAYBE I GO TO FAR IN SAYING THAT THIS ARTICLE IS NOTHING MORE THAN HERESAY. THE FIRST PARAGRAPH TELLS US THAT THE NEWS IS THAT THIS REPORT CAME OUT “LARGELY VINDICATING” THE SCIENTISTS. THE ARTICLE THEN DOESN’T GO ON TO TELL US JUST HOW THE WERE VINDICATED OR IF THE REASONING BEHIND THE VIDICATION IS JUSTIFIED.
An independent British report into the leak of hundreds of e-mails from one of the world’s leading climate research centers has largely vindicated the scientists involved, a finding many in the field hope will calm the global uproar dubbed “Climategate.”
THE EMAILS ARE OUT THERE. WHY DOESN’T THE AUTHOR COMPARE THEM TO THE REPORT? INSTEAD, HE WRITES AN ARTICLE WITHOUT GIVING US ANY REASONS WHY THE SCIENTISTS WERE JUSTIFIED IN WRITING WHAT THEY DID IN THEIR EMAILS OR FOR HIDING DATA. WHAT WE DO GET IS THE PR SPIN BY MUIR RUSSELL WHO FOR ALL WE KNOW HAS ABSOLUTELY EVERY MOTIVATION TO EXHONERATE THE SCIENTISTS.
The inquiry by former U.K. civil servant Muir Russell into the scandal at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit found there was no evidence of dishonesty or corruption in the more than 1,000 e-mails stolen and posted to the Internet late last year. But he did chide the scientists involved for failing to share their data with critics.
“We find that their rigor and honesty as scientists are not in doubt,” Russell said. “But we do find that there has been a consistent pattern of failing to display the proper degree of openness.”
WE DON’T GET ANY REASONS AS TO WHY THE SCIENTISTS WERE EXHONERATED EITHER.
WITH SUCH CHARGES,
The messages captured researchers speaking in scathing terms about their critics, discussing ways to stonewall skeptics of man-made climate change, and talking about how to freeze opponents out of peer-reviewed journals.
YOU WOULD THINK THAT A LITTLE MORE EXPLANATION WOULD BE IN ORDER. THIS IS PROBABLY BAD REPORTING AT ITS WORST.