The UK Global Warming Policy Foundation yesterday published a detailed assessment of the Climategate inquiries set up by the University of East Anglia and others. It finds that they avoided key questions and failed to probe some of the most serious allegations.
The report The Climategate Inquiries, written by Andrew Montford, finds that the inquiries into the conduct and integrity of scientists at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia were rushed and seriously inadequate.
In particular, the report finds that:
- None of the Climategate panels mounted an inquiry that was comprehensive within their area of remit
- Insufficient consideration in the choice of panel members led to a failure to ensure balance and independence
- None managed to be objective and comprehensive
- None made any serious attempt to consider the views and submissions of well-informed critics
- Terms of reference were either vague or non-existent
- None of them performed their work in a way that is likely to restore confidence in the work of CRU.
Andrew Montford, the author of the GWPF report, said:
"The lack of impartiality manifested itself in the different ways the panels treated CRU scientists and their critics. While CRU justifications and explanations were willingly accepted without any serious probing, critics were denied adequate opportunity to respond and to counter demonstrably inaccurate claims."
Despite the damning allegations made in this report, and the overwhelming evidence that changes in climate are not the result of human activity, the Australian government continues to push for an Emissions Trading Scheme, an international tax that will drive up the price of food, fuel, electricity and gas.
Who really runs our country???
Q&A Series 3 episode 31
Nick Minchin at 13:50 odd seconds he says "a clever American once said 'no person's life, liberty or property are secure while a legislature is in session' and there is something to be said for this situation where we have no government I think because no legislation being passed to infringe on the property of the citizens and I find that so much of the legislation I deal with (an enourmous amount) is just making more rules, creating more bureaucracy, costing more tax payers money um, I am delighted there is a bit of a breather in the process"
Makes me think when this guy is a liberal senator...
At 17:30 odd seconds Bob Katter starts talking, he proceeds to tell that if he cant ask his own question, he will not ask one... Someone supplies him with a question he is to ask, WHY???
And at approx 30:21 seconds there is a leading question about tax to the green rep which she replies "thankyou for your question" just like they do in question time like Katter said they have known question (and probably answers)...
Or is she making fun of the Q&A process?
You should read the following too.
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s3005375.htm for transcript of how Ghoulia will treat climate forum.
9mins 20secs into the interview,
KERRY O'BRIEN: OK. If we can look at your early priorities in this Gillard Government. Climate change has had a very checkered career within Labor's first term, and even during the campaign. When your climate change committee that you've agreed to with the Greens has been set up - which it will be done as - I think by late this month - what timeframe would you want to see for that committee? And are you committed to seeing legislation come into the Parliament within this term of office?
JULIA GILLARD: Well, in the spirit of including people, Kerry, it's not for me to dictate. But what I would like to see from that committee is that we can genuinely include, across the Parliament, people who believe climate change is real and who believe we will only reduce carbon pollution and meet our 2020 targets if we price carbon. And then with all of those people in the room, we'd work through to look for the points of agreement. I'm not going to prejudge, Kerry, how quickly that can be done, but I believe that there's a determination to approach this in a different spirit than the way the carbon pollution reduction scheme ultimately ended up being approached, where consensus was shattered and it was a matter of high partisanship between the major political parties.
Ghoulia Jillards actual ABC Transcript answer...
Is this one like-minded group or not?
Judging by these three things alone, what conclusions do you come to?
What about the 'super profits' tax that turned into 'rent resource' tax, was this the banks and retail sectors leaning on the gov? Even had a Prime Minister sacked?
The FACT our elected Prime Minister (who is portrayed to us as our leader, But each passing week is seeming more like a SPOKESPERSON) can be ousted in the way that has been done, I don't care how you put it, If I couldn't have a vote He/She is illegitimate to me. Same with the United Nations. If this is what Australians will accept, I think I am going to have real trouble in saying I am proud of this country.
The moment Kevin Rudd was sacked, Labor should have told the citizens of Australia who their new leader was, and then we should have been at the start of a 4 week campaign to elect a new leader of the country.
Also, If you watch Q and A on ABC1, 6th sept 2010, please watch for the 'twit'ter comments at the bottom of the screen, are they as juvenile to you as they are to me? (for the majority of 'twats' or 'tweets').