With the fraudulent background to climate claims, we should not have expected anything else – we now find the chosen Climategate Inquiry team of five men consisted of at least two pro-climate change scientists! The scandals just keep on coming â€“ the climate garbage is building up on either side of the information highway, and the rats are still spreading their disease.
Boulton the Fifth-Columnist
We should have known the climate inquiry would be slanted. One of the team, Prof Geofrey Boulton, is called upon to resign because he is not impartial. Another panel member has already quit. Boulton, it has been discovered, believes climate change is caused by human activity, making him very unsuitable to be part of an inquiry team. (The Scotsman, 13th Feb 2010).
As the Editorial (13th Feb) of The Scotsman newspaper reminds us, members of the Inquiry had to â€œhave no prejudicial interestâ€ or â€œpredetermined viewâ€ on climate change. Boulton and the other members knew this, and yet they remained quiet, pretending to be impartial. This is just what we have come to expect from the sneaky, dark side of pseudo-science.
Even better, Boulton worked for 18 years at East Anglia University, the same university of which the Climate Research Unit is a part!Â For reasons that are not acceptable, the Inquiry is to be held in private â€“ easy to then hide facts and truth and disseminate lies, once again. As The Scotsman said â€œSir Muir (Russell) may well have prejudiced the outcome before the inquiry has even started.â€ I think we can strike-out the words â€œmay well haveâ€â€¦ it began as a lie and would have exonerated Jones and pals by sleight-of-hand.
As Dr Benny Peiser and David Whitehouse said â€œThe Russell panel is in need of complete overhaul before it can be taken seriously.â€ (CCNet-News, 12th Feb). We can only be thankful that the full texts of emails were issued before self-interested scientists tried to remove them from view.
Andrew Montford (13th Feb) said that a â€œmajor question markâ€ is now over the whole of the Russell Review as about half of the five-man panel have been shown â€œto be wildly unsuitableâ€. He added: â€œmany will conclude that Muir Russell has set out to produce a predetermined result, not to reach the truth. Maybe they need to start again.â€ Too darn tootinâ€™! It was another attempt to commit fraud and to mislead. The government and Jones et al have too much to lose in all this. They will try to influence any panel along their own lines. Muir need not â€˜start againâ€™ â€“ just get rid of him and find men who will genuinely be impartial.
We can see that the people who set up the inquiry team are just as competent and truthful as the IPCC â€“ neither checks the facts or the truth, and neither care anyway.
Again, where is the U.S. media? I get more from media in Europe than I get here. Houston we have a problem.