Emails among climate scientists hacked from the CRU in late 2009 touched off a flurry of allegations about the scientists’ methods, and accusations that they have tried to squelch research that questions the case for human-induced global warming.
But many scientists – and top Obama administration officials – say the emails have revealed nothing that dents widespread evidence that Earth is warming and burning fossil fuels is a big reason why.
The new review – which is separate from a university-commissioned inquiry into the CRU’s handling of data – drew widespread coverage yesterday.
“The Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) may by the end of this year be the most investigated scientific body around,” notes a piece on Science magazine’s website.
The Science piece and others also detail Thursday’s London roll-out of the panel reviewing the CRU’s data handling methods.
Phillip Campbell, the editor-in-chief of Nature, quit the panel shortly after it was announced, following questions about his impartiality. He had said last year that the scientists in question have not hidden data. The Guardian details the resignation here.
Researching climate change researchers linked to CRU has become a growth industry.
But a Penn State University panel has already cleared Professor Michael Mann – one of the world’s most prominent climate researchers – of allegations of data suppression and falsification, concealment or destruction of emails and other information, and other claims. The administrative panel ordered further inquiry into Mann's global warming research practices by a group of faculty experts.
Yesterday Jim wrote about a briefing hosted by the Center for American Progress aimed at countering claims by climate skeptics that the record snowfall in Washington somehow undercuts evidence of global warming.
The New York Times’ “Room for Debate” feature includes a set of expert comments that address the issue from a different angle – the psychology of weather and climate change.