Muir Russell admits he didn't ask Phil Jones if he deleted emails

[IanC]

Muir Russell told the House of Commons committee that his inquiry into the ethics of the climategate principals did not include any questions that could lead to self incrimination because they didn't want to have to issue 'caution' (miranda in US). hahahaha. an inquiry that didn't look into wrongdoing and avoided the main areas of contention. wow, full exoneration is easy when you know which questions not to ask!

its too bad that the climategate saga is not easy to recap easily. the main thrust is that rules and ethics were subverted to affect IPCC2007 and climate science elite are more than willing to say "the ends justify the means".

 

[loosecannon]

thanks for the link.

 

[IanC]

thanks for the link.

Player
the 38:00 minute mark.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Muir Russell Interviews OJ Simpson regard his possible involvement in the Nicole Brown/Ron Goldman Murders.

Muir: Hey, OJ, how's it going?

OJ: Can't complain

Muir: Did you happen to catch the football game last night?

OJ: No, I was busy...er, yeah yeah! Hell of a game!

 

[IanC]

Watch the Pea Climate Audit

there is so much more to the story that doesn't get out to the public. the MPs did a better job of digging for the truth this time but the bullsh*t and misdirecting answers given by muir russell, acton and davies need to be examined. how many meetings need to be held to get to the bottom of this putrid scandal? not only of the principals of the email fiasco but the whitewash investigators as well. the Mann inquiries were just as superficial and concerned with whitewash as the UK ones.

 

[IanC]

Muir Russell Interviews OJ Simpson regard his possible involvement in the Nicole Brown/Ron Goldman Murders.

Muir: Hey, OJ, how's it going?

OJ: Can't complain

Muir: Did you happen to catch the football game last night?

OJ: No, I was busy...er, yeah yeah! Hell of a game!

exactly! remember when OJ was phoned in Chicago to inform him of his ex-wife's death and he dropped a glass and said he cut his hand doing it? the climategate scientists are giving out the same sort of crap excuses that would be ripped to shreds with a decent prosecutor.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gf8NK1WAOc[/ame]

 

[IanC]

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmsctech/444/444.pdf

the conclusions of the S&T committee of the british parliament came out. pdf above

Old Rocks will claim full exoneration but any reasonable person will see it as a sharp rebuke of all parties, investigated and investigators. it is full of carefully worded statements such as

para89- "On the allegation that e-mails were deleted to frustrate requests for information, a firm conclusion has proved elusive"

in other words, the principals weren't asked if they deleted them and no one demanded that they be produced.

an amazing document that points to all the glaring deficiencies, yet backs off just before the cliff. sort of a circle jerk of 'damned with faint praise' and 'that was bolloxed up but its done now'.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yep. And when all the verbage is done, the climate continues to warm, and unsettled weather continues to exact a toll on the agriculture that the world depends on. A nice fabricated sideshow from those that front for the energy corperations.

 

[IanC]

Yep. And when all the verbage is done, the climate continues to warm, and unsettled weather continues to exact a toll on the agriculture that the world depends on. A nice fabricated sideshow from those that front for the energy corperations.

really? you don't care if Climate Science principals get caught manipulating data, peer review, and their own integrity as long as the tainted evidence supports the concensus? you really need someone to expain why that is wrong? the AGW theory is only as strong as its weakest link, and there are a lot of broken links.

 

[IanC]

Graham Stringer MP proposed that paragraph 98 be rewritten as below, but was in a minority of one against three with the Chairman not voting:
“The disclosure of data from the Climatic Research Unit has been a traumatic and challenging experience for all involved and to the wider world. There are proposals to increase worldwide taxation by up to a trillion dollars on the basis of climate science predictions. This is an area where strong and opposing views are held.
“The release of the e-mails from CRU at the University of East Anglia and the accusations that followed demanded independent and objective scrutiny by independent panels. This has not happened. The composition of the two panels has been criticised for having members who were over identified with the views of CRU. Lord Oxburgh as President of the Carbon Capture and Storage Association and Chairman of Falck Renewable appeared to have a conflict of interest. Lord Oxburgh himself was aware that this might lead to criticism. Similarly Professor Boulton as an ex colleague of CRU seemed wholly inappropriate to be a member of the Russell panel. No reputable scientist who was critical of CRU’s work was on the panel, and prominent and distinguished critics were not interviewed. The Oxburgh panel did not do as our predecessor committee had been promised, investigate the science, but only looked at the integrity of the researchers. With the exception of Professor Kelly’s notes other notes taken by members of the panel have not been published. This leaves a question mark against whether CRU science is reliable. The Oxburgh panel also did not look at CRU’s controversial work on the IPPC which is what has attracted most series allegations. Russell did not investigate the deletion of e-mails. We are now left after three investigations without a clear understanding of whether or not the CRU science is compromised.”

at least one guy kept his integrity

 

[westwall]

The problem is it is the "official" dogma that AGW is occuring. This review basically say's "yes you did bad, now don't do it like that again, understand!" Wink, wink. I love how the wording was "should" give more data so others can try to replicate work, instead of "must".

Giving them an out yet again. Lawyers and language, what a pair.

 

[IanC]

bump for Trakar

 

[IanC]

thanks for the link.

Player
the 38:00 minute mark.

bump for Tyrone

 

[elektra]

Yep. And when all the verbage is done, the climate continues to warm, and unsettled weather continues to exact a toll on the agriculture that the world depends on. A nice fabricated sideshow from those that front for the energy corperations.

Agriculture is suffering? Link, or wear your label of liar, which you declare when others do not link.

Crock, are you a liar and a hypocrite?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Yep. And when all the verbage is done, the climate continues to warm, and unsettled weather continues to exact a toll on the agriculture that the world depends on. A nice fabricated sideshow from those that front for the energy corperations.

really? you don't care if Climate Science principals get caught manipulating data, peer review, and their own integrity as long as the tainted evidence supports the concensus? you really need someone to expain why that is wrong? the AGW theory is only as strong as its weakest link, and there are a lot of broken links.

No one was caught manipulating data...its a delusion..there were Six Investigations ...all of them cleared the Scientist ALL OF THEM
Sixth Independent Investigation Clears "Climategate ...

 

[elektra]

No one was caught manipulating data...its a delusion..there were Six Investigations ...all of them cleared the Scientist ALL OF THEM

link to the six investigations

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

at least one guy kept his integrity

"Climategate" Scientists Cleared of Wrongdoing - Again ...
it sure was not the ones who stole the E mails for sure

 

[elektra]

at least one guy kept his integrity

"Climategate" Scientists Cleared of Wrongdoing - Again ...
it sure was not the ones who stole the E mails for sure

That is a link to an article about? It is not a link to investigations, an opinion expressed in an article is hardly factual or something suitable for discussion.

 

[elektra]

"I found it with Google, it must be true"