In case you haven’t heard yet, there is something of a ruckus going on because a global warming “think tank” has been hacked and many damning documents and emails have been released into the wilds of the internet. Or possibly an insider has intentionally leaked them.
Good comment at Samizdata:
Until now scientists have tended to be regarded by the public as white coated, rather otherworldly and impartial seekers of The Truth. Now it seems at leaset some of them are willing to be government stooges, who will to tow the government line in order to keep their jobs and pensions. This was demonstrated a few weeks ago when a scientist was sacked by the British government for contradicting their policy pronouncements on drugs. Now this.
About the only good thing to come out of this is that people might be more skeptical (pun intended) when, in future, government proposes yet another restriction on their liberties in the name of “the science”.
Follow the link to Samizdata as a starting point and spend a while following links and reading for yourself.
A searchable database of the material may be found here.
One more comment from Samizdata to boil it down:
The defence barriers are going up. Roger Harrabin (Link)talks about these being peripheral issues and it being normal in science for comments to be made. He would be right except for a three minor points in the presentation of the science.
– the claims that the science is settled.
– the claims that anyone who does not agree is a crank or has ulterior motives (e.g. in the pay of oil companies)
– the claim that the demarcation between climate science & deniers is peer reviews.
All this shows is that climatology, like other empirical sciences, is partisan. The difference is that in climatology, only one viewpoint is funded and given repsctful consideration. More importantly, this is no mere ivory-towered scandal. On the basis of such partisan opinions are governments being manouvered into embracing world government and a major reduction in global living standards.