The article is a very dry discussion as to why scientists need to be open, engage the public and provide their data and methods for scrutiny. All good stuff, if a little late with the billions now being spent on this global warming farce. The BBC's implication is that global warming is real, just that the scientists behind it are a bit dodgy.
A better article would examine Phil Jones and the other climate priests in some detail, to determine their reliability as scientists supposedly studying these matters. It would look at their research grants, their prospects if the global warming funding were to dry up, their track record in following the ideals in the article above, etc. For example, the WSJ has managed this:
Consider the case of Phil Jones, the director of the CRU and the man at the heart of climategate. According to one of the documents hacked from his center, between 2000 and 2006 Mr. Jones was the recipient (or co-recipient) of some $19 million worth of research grants, a sixfold increase over what he'd been awarded in the 1990s.
Why did the money pour in so quickly? Because the climate alarm kept ringing so loudly: The louder the alarm, the greater the sums. And who better to ring it than people like Mr. Jones, one of its likeliest beneficiaries?
There is enough material here for a month of headlines, much more than the politician expenses scandal. Still the BBC hardly lead from the front on that one either. Where is the media? They have the resources to investigate these things properly, their one advantage over bloggers and the like. They should press this advantage to the full.This is the sort of comment [on BBC web site] that leaves me cold, from Bob Couttie in the Philippines. [In general the comments seem very kind to the scientists, particularly the top ones that people are most likely to read. Does the BBC fiddle with comments too?]
But the general public is largely neither scientifically educated nor
capable of critical thinking, as the majority belief in a wide swathe
of twaddle from creationism to astrology, fork-bending, the 9/11
conspiracy and the 2012 'cataclysm' demonstrates. It cannot 'follow and
argument' nor spot evasion.
Like a page out of '1984'. This great believer in democracy would have us all run by a bunch of clever scientists in a single world government.
Anyway the number of google hits on 'climategate' was 12m on Monday, 13m yesterday and 18m today. Tell me who isn't capable of critical thinking? It's the bloody scientists who got us into this mess. Those grant-seeking, dishonest, data-hiding, model-making self-important parasites who have no interest in science at all, only environmentalism.Today the story is that Phil Jones has finally stepped down (reported also by the BBC). A week late, but at least he has done something.
Professor Jones said: "What is most important is that CRU continues its
world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as
possible. After a good deal of consideration I have decided that the
best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the Director's role
during the course of the independent review and am grateful to the
University for agreeing to this. The Review process will have my full
I agree with many people who say that serious criminal charges should be lade against anyone who has faked or manipulated data, conspired to avoid official information requests, etc.
Of course there is the question of how someone like Phil Jones (or Al Gore) could possibly step back from global warming. Could they ever admit they were wrong? Al Gore has seldom been right about anything, so perhaps it would be easier for him. But Phil Jones would find it hard to get $19m of grants from, say, studying swamp life in the Fens.
Unlike the BBC, CBS News appears to be reporting this matter with some interest. On their front page just now is a blog post about climategate which nicely summarises the situation so far. The question is whether the various guilty parties can survive in their bunker until this blows over. If they can, it probably means that the global warming religion is impervious to any outside influence.