A committee of MPs has described two independent inquiries into the ‘climategate scandal’ as ‘unsatisfactory’ because they failed to answer important questions about allegedly missing emails.
Official inquiries into the ‘Climategate’ scandal ‘unsatisfactory’
By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent, UK Telegraph
The University of East Anglia set up two investigations into emails stolen from its Climatic Research Unit (CRU), which sceptics claimed showed scientists were willing to manipulate the science behind global warming.
Both inquiries cleared the researchers of scientific impropriety but campaigners insisted that questions remained over the openness of research and the content of certain emails.
An investigation by the Science and Technology Committee into the official inquiries is the latest effort to get to the bottom of the matter.
More...
MPS Slam 'Secretive' Climategate Probes
By John Ingham, Daily Express
TWO inquiries into claims that scientists manipulated data about global warming were yesterday condemned by MPs as ineffective and too secretive.
The row, which became known as Climategate, erupted in 2009 over allegations that researchers had deliberately strengthened evidence suggesting human activity was to blame for rising temperatures.
MPs on the Science and Technology Committee have now concluded that both probes into the scandal had failed to “fully investigate” claims that scientists had deleted embarrassing emails.
Flawed ‘Climategate’ Inquiries Failed To Restore Confidence In UK Climate Science
Dr. Benny Peiser, Global Warming Policy Foundation
The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) remains deeply concerned about the failure by academic and parliamentary inquires to fully and independently investigate the 'Climategate' affair.
The latest follow-up report by the Science and Technology Committee on the disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) confirms that the Climategate inquiries had serious flaws, lacked balance and transparency and failed to achieve their objective to restore trust and confidence in British climate science.
The report by the Science and Technology Committee shows that the inquiries into the conduct and integrity of scientists at the Climatic Research Unit were deficient and biased.
