Muir Russell report on climate-Gate – Select Ctte member responds

Dr Evan Harris, the former Lib Dem MP, who was a key member of the Commons Science and Technology Committee which conducted an earlier enquiry into the Climate Research Unit at the UEA, said:

This report simply reinforces the findings of the Select Committee, that the scientists’ reputations remain intact, that the data and results are reliable and that the University failed to handle FoI requests adequately.”

“The response of sceptic groups, like the Global Warming Policy Foundation, in rejecting all three enquiries merely demonstrates that conspiracy theorists and the anti-science brigade are never satisfied by due process and scientific methods and it is more important that such groups are marginalised by policy-makers.”

“It is important that the scientists concerned in this episode are supported by their peers and able to continue their important work, and that all publicly-funded research institutions understand the need to be more open with their raw data especially after research is published.”


3 Responses to “Muir Russell report on climate-Gate – Select Ctte member responds”

  1. Philip C James Says:

    Shouldn’t we have a World Data Bank for the raw climate data?

    Allow sceptics to use the same data to test their theories, without wasting the time of scientists required to answer repeated FoI requests for data. It appears the swamping tactic of Denial Of Service (DoS) attacks can be as effective in the battle to combat climate change as it can in cyber-warfare.

    Humankind-induced Climate Change have to answer one basic question: why do they think we can release over 300 years the carbon nature has locked away in the rocks over 300 MILLION years WITHOUT having some effect on our ecosystem?

    If they accept that, we can then consider what and how large those effects are…

  2. Katabasis Says:

    Dear Dr. Harris,
    speaking of “conspiracy theorists”, can you please proffer the evidence that the emails were in fact hacked, rather than leaked from the CRU, otherwise I’ll just assume that you are in support of a completely baseless conspiracy theory.


  3. Bishop Hill Says:

    Professor McKitrick submitted evidence to the S&TC committee that Professor Jones had fabricated part of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report. It was remarkable to see the committee exonerate Jones without any evidence having been offered in his defence.

    Evidence-based policy? Doesn’t your exoneration of Jones suggest that you do not actually mean anything by this phrase?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: