Of course this ain't over. This only raises the level of conspiracy for the climate skeptics. Undoubtedly they'll charge that the report's a whitewash and that they know the truth about "so called climate science" ("It's socialism," my friend Heather says.)Well take a look at this editorial in today's Tribune-Review:
A new report upholds climate alarmists' preordained blame-mankind conclusions and "exonerates" the university's Climatic Research Unit by whitewashing its scientific misconduct documented in the Climategate e-mails. It's a clumsy whitewashing, too -- one whose conclusions were just as preordained.What's pre-ordained is The Tribune-Review's anti-science dogma. I wonder if they realize the unintended humor of this passage (the first sentence, by the way) from the editorial:
This report is touted as "independent" but was commissioned by the university. It was headed by one Muir Russell, described in media accounts as a former civil servant -- which doesn't exactly connote scientific or statistical expertise.
The University of East Anglia got what it paid for -- a fig leaf intended to hide the truth about climate alarmism.This from the paper whose owner has shoveled millions of dollars to the Heritage Foundation and then uses the "research" from that foundation as some sort of "independent" confirmation.