Posted by
Catmman on Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:30:48 AM
George Monbiot,
one of the fiercest propagandists of the 'global warming' faith,
realizes he may have been wrong (at least partially), should have been more skeptical (on climate 'science') as a journalist:
It’s no use pretending that this isn’t a major blow. The emails
extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University
of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging(1). I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I’m dismayed and deeply shaken by them.
Yes, the messages were obtained illegally. Yes, all of us say things
in emails that would be excruciating if made public. Yes, some of the
comments have been taken out of context. But there are some messages
that require no spin to make them look bad. There appears to be
evidence here of attempts to prevent scientific data from being
released(2,3), and even to destroy material that was subject to a freedom of information request(4).
Worse still, some of the emails suggest efforts to prevent the publication of work by climate sceptics(5,6), or to keep it out of a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(7).
I believe that the head of the unit, Phil Jones, should now resign.
Some of the data discussed in the emails should be re-analysed.
This is hardly a complete "Road to Damascus" moment for Mr. Monbiot but at least there is an admission from a longtime alarmist that these e-mails show a trend of negative behavior and bad science. Mr. Monbiot is also man enough to admit this is bad for the 'consensus' and there should be "re-analysation" of the data.
Perhaps Katie Couric could pen a neat little diddy (like this one) addressing how the American press has also been overzealous in their fearmongering for the 'global warming' alarmist camp? Also still waiting for Andrew Revkin of the New York Times to show at least the same measure of fortitude as Mr. Monbiot.