Count me as one among millions of the skeptics of this whole "human-induced global warming" chicken little phenomena. I believe it is, by far, the biggest money grab ever concocted by a bunch of ne'er say die hippies from the 60's who never fully got over being ignored. That said, we have an interesting response from the head whiner caught in the middle of the aptly named "Climate Gate" conspiracy:
Michael Mann, co-author of the Copenhagen Diagnosis and lead author of the UN IPCC Third Assessment Report, blamed skeptics for taking the personal emails out of context.
"What they've done is search through stolen personal emails—confidential between colleagues who often speak in a language they understand and is often foreign to the outside world. Suddenly, all these are subject to cherry picking," he said.
They've turned "something innocent into something nefarious," Mann added.
The vital point being left out, he said, is that "regardless of how cherry-picked," there is "absolutely nothing in any of the emails that calls into the question the deep level of consensus of climate change."
This is a "smear campaign to distract the public," said Mann. "Those opposed to climate action, simply don't have the science on their side," he added.
"We, here in our cushy little echo chamber, talk in our own language of colloquialisms and double-speak and we all agree with each other. That makes us right because we're smarter than you are."
In a separate piece at the WSJ, the head dude at the unit where the emails were originally "stolen" from offered an even weaker faux-defense of his colleagues:
Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, from which the emails were lifted, is singing from the same climate hymnal. "My colleagues and I accept that some of the published emails do not read well. I regret any upset or confusion caused as a result. Some were clearly written in the heat of the moment, others use colloquialisms frequently used between close colleagues," he said this week.
Hunh...who knew scientists could accidentally SAY the whole thing was a scam when what they meant to say was that the earth is doomed to die in 10 years?
My favorite bit in today's episode comes from Vice-Chancellor of Research Trevor Davies, AGAIN, from the research unit where the emails were originally "stolen" from:
"There is nothing in the stolen material which indicates that peer-reviewed publications by CRU, and others, on the nature of global warming and related climate change are not of the highest-quality of scientific investigation and interpretation."
Professor Davies called the stolen data "the latest example of a sustained and, in some instances, a vexatious campaign" designed "to distract from reasoned debate" about urgent action governments must take to reverse climate change.
Pot? Meet Kettle. Kettle? Meet Pot.
BTW-vexatious means we, the "we don't believe you" crowd, are annoying them.