That's The
Amazing Revkin for you -- the New York Times'
DotEarth
blogger/environmental
reporter
attempts some M*A*S*H-style meatball surgery this morning on
the badly hemorrhaging climate alarmoscientists'
scandal that has erupted in East Anglia, UK. First he
acknowledges that some of the most prominent climate fictionalizers in the world
said some
very naughty things about global warming skeptics, but then
he promptly cues the violins:
Some of the correspondence portrays the scientists as
feeling under siege by the skeptics’ camp and worried that any
stray comment or data glitch could be turned against them.
And then Revkin asserts that it's all pretty meaningless in the
overall scheme:
The evidence pointing to a growing human contribution to
global warming is so widely accepted that the hacked material
is unlikely to erode the overall argument.
Revkin has authored
two global warming books and so has a lot to lose himself
from this controversy, as his reputation is just as much at stake
as the scientists.' Therefore his defense mechanisms are fully
engaged. In
his blog post yesterday about the revelations, he states that
repercussions "continue to unfold" and "there’s much more to
explore," but do you really think he can be counted on for
follow-up stories about it this week? We'll see, but this
attitude doesn't give much hope:
The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and
contain all manner of private information and statements that
were never intended for the public eye, so they won’t be posted
here. But a quick sift of skeptics’ Web sites will point anyone
to plenty of sources.
And what a surprise: He offers no links to those skeptics' sites.
Meanwhile, blogger Tom Nelson
notes Revkin's past freedom-of-information heroics when it
came to scrutinizing the Bush administration. So while Revkin and
alarmists
engage in crybabyism, the climate realists among us train our
eyes on the substantive. For example, Czech physicist Lubos Motl
identified
a few juicy morsels from the emails, including one in which
the University of East Anglia CRU's Phil Jones writes to U.S.
atmospheric scientist (and realist) John Christy:
...If anything, I would like to see the climate change
happen, so the science could be proved right, regardless of the
consequences. This isn't being political, it is being selfish.
Cheers, Phil
Indeed, selfishness
appears to be at the heart of much of the alarmism movement. Motl
discovers money transfer methods and tax evasion schemes, as well
as Jones's well-funded endeavors over the years:
So far, the most interesting file I found...shows that
since 1990, Phil Jones has collected staggering 13.7 million
British pounds ($22.6 million) in grants.
There is oh-so-much. Like
I said yesterday, it's like watching the ACORN-sting videos
over and over again because you just can't believe what you're
seeing.
topics:
Global Warming, Environmentalism, Climate Change
