Climategate Inquiry Vindicates Scientists

Environmental advocates rejoice

This article is from the archive of our partner .

When the "Climategate" scandal first broke it was a triumphant day for climate-change skeptics. They scolded the scientific community for distorting global warming data and declared cap-and-trade "dead." But now the results of an investigation by the British government are out and the report largely sides with the scientists.  The report says there's "no evidence to support charges that the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit or its director, Phil Jones, had tampered with data or perverted the peer review process to exaggerate the threat of global warming." Consequently, global warming advocates are reveling in the news.

  • Finally the Truth Emerges, writes Steven D at Booman Tribune: "So what did all these accused mad evil climatologists do? Like most good and honest scientists before them, they analyzed their data properly and came to a conclusion supported by that data. The data showed that human activities, especially the release of carbon into the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels, had led to an unprecedented rise in global temperatures since the start of the Industrial Revolution, and that this warming trend was creating significant changes to the earth's climate."
  • Will Deniers Listen? Probably Not, writes Climate Progress: "No doubt virtually all of the core findings will be ignored by the anti-science crowd, who will continue to push their while conspiracy theories about climate scientists."
  • The Scientists Do Have to Change Their Habits Though, notes Fred Pearce at The New Scientist. The report wasn't a complete vindication of the scientists:
The MPs found that the leaked emails reveal that a "culture of withholding information appears to have pervaded CRU [that] we consider unacceptable". Some information "may have been deleted", possibly in breach of the law. The MPs do not accept CRU's claim that its staff were simply overwhelmed by requests for data, often frivolous. Rather, CRU's "unhelpful approach" to requests led to them "multiplying".
  • That Settles That, I Hope, writes PZ Myers at Pharyngula: "Case closed, right? Or is this another sign of the Global Conspiracy to Hide the Truth™?"
This article is from the archive of our partner The Wire.