Yet another example of alarmist scientific misconduct
NYTimes: Polar bear-gate a ‘minor sideshow’
Comments | Print friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
When the New York Times first opined on Climategate (December 6, 2009), the paper called it “noise.” On Saturday, the paper had this to say about Polar bear-gate in an editorial entitled “A Polarizing Polar Bear Investigation“:
… Whatever the ultimate verdict on Dr. Monnett, the controversy over his observations is a minor sideshow in the global warming debate. A broad array of evidence suggests that polar bear populations — and the health of the planet — will be threatened by climate change in future decades even if not a single additional polar bear drowns while swimming far from shore.
But given that Climategate’s “noise” helped take down cap-and-trade and, now, the seminal study in polar bear hysteria may be yet another example of alarmist scientific misconduct, perhaps the Times ought to be questioning that “broad array” of “suggestive” evidence rather than simply dismissing Polar bear-gate as a “minor sideshow.”