Whitewash or Cover-Up. AGW Has Friends in HIgh Places.

I have not blogged for more than a month while I have been trying to recharge my battery—i.e., to stop being so gloomy about the cover-up by the AGW establishment.  See my earlier post about the IPCC whitewash here

Well,  how is the cover-up doing?

The US mainstream media has done their part by not reporting how screwed up the IPCC is and about the “Climategate” revelations of scientists cooking the books as well as preventing people with opposing views to be heard.  And in the Senate,  new legislation will be proposed that is cap and trade, kinda lite.  Congress lives in an alternate universe where  they believe that nothing is worth considering that trumps their need to tax and regulate .  See

By contrast,  the UK media has done excellent investigating work.   But  the UK government  and the “Royal Societies” are actively working to support the AGW cause—-no holds barred.

The book cooking, etc, revealed in the leaked Climategate e-mails from the Climate Research Center (CRU) of the East Anglia University have prompted inquiries.  One of the inquiry panels headed by Lord Oxburgh,  was set up by the University of East Anglia to look at the research produced by scientists at its Climatic Research Unit.

Oxburgh was an entirely inappropriate choice to head this panel..   From Lawerence Solomon’s  entry in the National Post,—- “Oxburgh is chair of the multinational Falck Renewables, a European leader with major windfarms in the U.K., France, Spain and Italy, and he’s chair of the Carbon Capture and Storage Association, a lobby group which argues that carbon capture could become a $-trillion industry by 2050.  And Solomon quotes an Oxburgh statement ““We are sleepwalking” into a global warming threat so dire, Lord Oxburgh explained in 2007, that the world may need to do more to discourage carbon dioxide emitters than to simply put a price on carbon. “It may be that we shall need, in parallel with that, regulations which impose very severe penalties on people who emit more than specified amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere,” he explained.

So when Oxburgh’s panel announce on 15 April that after three weeks of study,  they found that the CRU scientists did not act improperly,  are you surprised?

Steve McIntyre does a great job of pointing out how shallow this review by Oxburgh’s panel really was.  He notes that no skeptic was a part of the panel  and that one of the main charges of fraud, the hockey stick temperature chart (hide the decline), was not even examined.  Further, Oxburgh says don’t  blame the scientists at CRU but rather  blame the IPCC authors  for anything that was not properly attributed .   McIntyre shows that the CRU scientists were the main IPCC authors in this instance.  To read McIntyre’s take down of the Oxburgh report, read this and this.

There is even more.   The Russell panel has been looking into the Climategate scandal and is  now preparing a report as well.  It is clear that the report will also excuse the CRU of any wrong doing.  This seems certain because one of the panel members thought the scientists made some serious mistakes.   The panel leader will not include these comments in the final report for fear that they will be sued for libel.   So,  not to worry.   No matter what we find we can’t tell about the things you did wrong.  To see Bishop Hills entry on this and this.

One wag said,  these investigations are equivalent to asking Mrs Madof to audit her husband’s books.

In answer to my question as to how the coverup is doing,  it is clear that it is doing very well.

There is more,  but I am getting depressed again.

Cbdakota