Interesting how the people who for years pointed fingers and screamed "Liar" and "Fraud" against anyone who dared to question the science behind the claimed CO2 theory of global warming, turn out themselves to be doing exactly that. It is called psychological projection, accusing others of what you do yourself, and neither doctors nor scientists are immune from it. The press release below is from a conservative think-tank, but I’ve posted articles on this previously, and know it is authentic.
Govt-Funded Research Unit Destroyed Original Climate Data
by Christine Hall
October 5, 2009
CEI Petitions EPA to Reopen Global Warming Rulemaking
Washington, D.C., October 6, 2009
In the wake of a revelation by a key research institution that it destroyed its original climate data, the Competitive Enterprise Institute petitioned EPA to reopen a major global warming proceeding.
In mid-August the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) disclosed that it had destroyed the raw data for its global surface temperature data set because of an alleged lack of storage space. The CRU data have been the basis for several of the major international studies that claim we face a global warming crisis. CRU’s destruction of data, however, severely undercuts the credibility of those studies.
In a declaration filed with CEI’s petition, Cato Institute scholar and climate scientist Patrick Michaels calls CRU’s revelation “a totally new element” that “violates basic scientific principles, and “throws even more doubt” on the claims of global warming alarmists.
CEI’s petition, filed late Monday with EPA, argues that CRU’s disclosure casts a new cloud of doubt on the science behind EPA’s proposal to regulate carbon dioxide. EPA stopped accepting public comments in late June but has not yet issued its final decision. As CEI’s petition argues, court rulings make it clear that agencies must consider new facts when those facts change the underlying issues.
CEI general counsel Sam Kazman stated, “EPA is resting its case on international studies that in turn relied on CRU data. But CRU’s suspicious destruction of its original data, disclosed at this late date, makes that information totally unreliable. If EPA doesn’t reexamine the implications of this, it’s stumbling blindly into the most important regulatory issue we face.”
Among CRU’s funders are the EPA and the U.S. Department of Energy – U.S. taxpayers.
Go to the original item for more interesting details.
Austria Early Snow Records
Montana Early Cold Records