Jonathan,
My immediate reaction is to applaud this decision. These are two high
profile deniers and getting them
to state their case with their main supporting evidence in public is
exactly what we want, in my opinion.
Sure they'll get publicity and sure they'll get more drongos signing
up, but they'll have been flushed out into the open and they won't
easily be able to change their position to any great degree in the
future and the might of the scientific army and evidence will be able
to take their position apart over the space of a few months or a year
at most.
And so our case will be correspondingly strengthened by virtue of the
'fabricated doubts' being demolished and only the progressively
shrinking 'real doubts' remaining. (When will the IPCC increase the
level of confidence that global warming is caused by man from its
current 90%?).
Best regards,
Brian Orr
On 1 Mar 2010, at 14:52, Jonathan Ward wrote:
> Please note who the speakers are at three O’Clock….
>
> What process was used to enable two people from GWPF to be
> considered as witnesses?
> Not much surprises me anymore, but this did. I would like to know
> who made this decision and on what basis? What are the relevant
> criteria and qualifications for being a witness, and why are there
> two people from a recent organisation (with quite clear aims in
> terms of its media coverage) whilst other longer estabilished and
> more relevant organisation are not included?
>
> http://news.parliament.uk/2010/03/mps-examine-data-disclosure-from-university-of-east-anglia/
> MPs examine data disclosure from University of East Anglia
> 1 March 2010
> The Science and Technology Committee holds an evidence session on
> the disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit at
> the University of East Anglia. Watch live from 3pm.
> Video and Audio: climate data evidence session
> Commons Science and Technology Committee
> Witnesses
>
> 3pm
>
> Lord Lawson of Blaby, Chairman, Global Warming Policy Foundation
> Dr Benny Peiser, Director, Global Warming Policy Foundation
> 3.30pm
>
> Richard Thomas CBE, former Information Commissioner
> 4pm
>
> Professor Edward Acton, Vice-Chancellor, University of East Anglia
> Professor Phil Jones, Director of the Climatic Research Unit
> 4.40pm
>
> Sir Muir Russell, Head of the Independent Climate Change E-Mails
> Review
> 5pm
>
> Professor John Beddington, Government Chief Scientific Adviser
> Professor Julia Slingo OBE, Chief Scientist, Met Office
> Professor Bob Watson, Chief Scientist, Defra
> The Committee's inquiry is examining the unauthorised publication of
> data, emails and documents relating to the work of the Climatic
> Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA).
>
> The Committee has made available all the evidence submissions it has
> received in this inquiry ahead of this evidence session.
>
> Memoranda: disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research
> Unit at the University of East Anglia
> Background
>
> On 1 December 2009 Phil Willis, Chairman of the Science and
> Technology Committee, wrote to Professor Edward Acton, Vice-
> Chancellor of UEA following the considerable press coverage of the
> data, emails and documents relating to the work of the Climatic
> Research Unit (CRU). The coverage alleged that data may have been
> manipulated or deleted in order to produce evidence on global
> warming. On 3 December the UEA announced an Independent Review into
> the allegations to be headed by Sir Muir Russell.
>
> The Independent Review will:
>
> Examine the hacked e-mail exchanges, other relevant e-mail exchanges
> and any other information held at CRU to determine whether there is
> any evidence of the manipulation or suppression of data which is at
> odds with acceptable scientific practice and may therefore call into
> question any of the research outcomes.
> Review CRU's policies and practices for acquiring, assembling,
> subjecting to peer review and disseminating data and research
> findings, and their compliance or otherwise with best scientific
> practice.
> Review CRU's compliance or otherwise with the University's policies
> and practices regarding requests under the Freedom of Information
> Act ('the FOIA') and the Environmental Information Regulations ('the
> EIR') for the release of data.
> Review and make recommendations as to the appropriate management,
> governance and security structures for CRU and the security,
> integrity and release of the data it holds.
