Another shoe dropped in the Climategate scandal today with the release of thousands more emails revealing how the scientists who contributed to the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) conspired to hide and manipulate data calling into question the theory of man-caused global warming.
Since 2008, The Heartland Institute has hosted six international conferences on climate change featuring hundreds of scientists and climate change experts. (See coverage and materials here.) Heartland also has published two comprehensive collections of climate research, Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) and Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report. Both stand as a counterpoint to the reports issued by the IPCC.
The following statements from climate science experts at The Heartland Institute may be used for attribution. For more comments, refer to the contact information below. To book a Heartland guest on your program, please contact Tammy Nash at [email protected] and 312/377-4000. After regular business hours, contact Jim Lakely at [email protected] and 312/731-9364.
“Congress should be interested in finding out who in DOE is providing such advice – and why? Can Dr. Chu provide answers? This quote from Phil Jones is particularly interesting: ‘Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden. I’ve discussed this with the main funder (US Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.'”
“The newly divulged emails confirm what was made clear in the first batch of Climategate emails: that the most prominent advocates of a global warming crisis habitually engage in anti-science shenanigans designed to fool the public into believing humans are creating a global warming crisis. The authors and recipients of these emails should be ashamed of themselves for working together to deceive the public and to smear skeptics who actually follow proper scientific protocol.”
“What continues to amaze me is how much time and effort a group of scientists puts into crafting talking points and refining messages rather than discussing actual science. References to ‘the cause’ and discussions about how to best convince policy makers to make particular decisions have no place in legitimate scientific research. And, given the fact that many of these scientists directly benefit from public policy decisions made in accordance with their wishes, it is rather disturbing that they choose to interject themselves into such discussions.
“Mann, Bradley, Jones and the rest of the acolytes of the First Church of Global Warming sound a lot more like public relations agents than scientists in a great many of these e-mails. They should be embarrassed, but their activities over the years have made it abundantly clear that they are beyond any sense of shame.”
“‘Even judges read the newspapers,’ a wise man once observed. Hopefully, this includes the judges in Washington, DC who are now considering legal challenges to the science the federal government uses to justify regulating greenhouse gas emissions.
“Disclosure of the emails in Climategate 1 came too late to be included in the official U.S. Environmental Protection Agency record now being reviewed by the DC appellate court, and the emails disclosed today in Climategate 2 came too late as well.
“In June 2009 – before either Climategate 1 or 2 – Heartland contributed to the record its publication Climate Change Reconsidered, which demonstrated even then that the science EPA used was faulty. Now that point is established beyond a doubt. One way or the other, the judges will get it.”
(Ms. Martin concentrates her practice in environmental law.)
“These emails and their predecessors expose an insular culture within the climate science community that instinctively shuts down dissenting opinions and intentionally presents results with specific policy agendas in mind. Though I don’t condone the act by which these emails were obtained, I think the scientists involved should use this as an opportunity for self-reflection. If the first round of Climategate emails was any indication, they won’t.”
The Heartland Institute is a 27-year-old national nonprofit organization with offices in Chicago, Illinois; Washington, DC; Austin, Texas; Tallahassee, Florida; and Columbus, Ohio. Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems. For more information, visit our Web site or call 312/377-4000.