"You wouldn't accept that at a grade 9 science fair…" – CBC finds a moment of clarity on Climategate

Wow, just wow. What an editorial. The CBC’s Rex Murphy on Climategate.

h/t to WUWT reader David Davidovics

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
December 3, 2009 11:58 pm

Wow, when all else fails, you can still count on a Newfie to just tell it like it is. Hat tip to the people of The Rock, and Rex++.

December 3, 2009 11:59 pm

\o/ It’s over Rex has spoken, this man carries weight of opinion. Let the rout begin. Tally ho!

December 4, 2009 12:03 am

About time!.
Everyone needs to see that. Spread the word.
Tim, Vic, Australia

December 4, 2009 12:06 am

Fantastic. You can’t get more fair than that.
Alarmists claim that these e-mails “do not disprove man-made climate change.” That is true, however, these e-mails demonstrate clearly that man-mide climate change was never fully proven to begin with, it was manipulated into existence through selective omission of counter-argument.

December 4, 2009 12:07 am

Superb! Just Superb!

Richard Lawson
December 4, 2009 12:09 am

Wow Climategate and ipcc review news headlines on BBC Radio 4. Tipping point 4 UK news.

Paul Vaughan
December 4, 2009 12:09 am

FYI: “The National” is a very serious program. This video is not partisan. I suspect the delayed MSM response in Canada is because media higher-ups wanted to “wait & see” and do careful research before going public.

Evan Jones
December 4, 2009 12:11 am

He sure said a mouthful!

December 4, 2009 12:11 am

At long last…

Jack Green
December 4, 2009 12:13 am

And still no “lame-stream media” has covered this. CNN has done a couple of pieces but they will when it blows up at Nopenhagen.
This is wonderful and so true. We need hit the reset button and put these guys (scientists) on real problems not political ones. The vast majority of them are good guys with good intentions just caught up in trying to make a living. It’s the Gore’s of the world that are making a living off of people’s fears.
Since Gore invented the internet it will destroy him and his money greed scheme from spreading fear.

Doug in Seattle
December 4, 2009 12:14 am

I don’t know how much the CBC has changed since I left Canada 16 years ago, but I doubt it has become less left leaning in its bias.
Even Canada’s Conservatives (at least eastern ones) had pretty much either drank the the kool-aid or given up their fight. For such a liberal/left bastion as the CBC to backslide toward skepticism is quite amazing.
That to me makes Rex’s opinion piece that much more important.

Bill Frumkin
December 4, 2009 12:14 am

Wow, the truth will out. I hope the flood gates will now open and mainsteream media will start to report the truth. I advise my friends who believe in AGW to not be the last ones on board this sinking ship.

David Davidovics
December 4, 2009 12:18 am

He blew me away too. Found reference to this on a newspaper blog so I started looking for it and gave my family in canada a heads up so they can catch the 10:00PM broadcast (I’m in austrailia at the moment). My Dad replied back with a youtube link and I got it here as fast as I could.
As I mentioned earlier, there is also a CTV report from the same night to keep an eye out for, but its not as scathing as this.

December 4, 2009 12:21 am

wow.. i am blown away.
if only all reporters could speak like him and not be bound by the pressures of the MSM. and to actually report things

December 4, 2009 12:22 am

Outstanding! Thank you CBC, you did good. 😉

Jesper Berg
December 4, 2009 12:22 am

Powerful speech. Maybe CBC actually followed the advice of this activist:

December 4, 2009 12:26 am

Rex’s aim is true. A perfect bullseye.
Here’s some Christmas cheer from our furry friends for the moderators, if not for the rest:

December 4, 2009 12:28 am

I am speechless

Mark Fawcett
December 4, 2009 12:28 am

Now that’s a piece of journalism – even-toned, eloquent, measured and objective.
There used to be a time I’d look to the BBC to be the standard bearer, sadly that time has long since departed.

John Peter
December 4, 2009 12:33 am

On BBC’s main News page: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8394483.stm
“UN body probes climate e-mail row
The United Nations panel on climate change is to probe claims UK scientists manipulated global warming data to boost the argument that it is man-made.
The organisation’s chairman Dr Rajendra Pachauri told BBC Radio 4’s The Report programme the claims were serious and he wants them investigated.”
That will be an interesting investigation. I wonder who will be appointed to provide an “impartial” report.

Claude Harvey
December 4, 2009 12:35 am

I never saw an editorial I didn’t think I could have improved upon; until this one.

Roger Knights
December 4, 2009 12:38 am

What a contrast to the Nature editorial. And how sickly the latter looks in comparison. I hope they are both printed side-by-side in in books of the future.

Alec J
December 4, 2009 12:41 am

BBC R4 Today programme Fri morning carried a ten minute slot on Climategate in their flagship 08:10 slot. This is usually the preserve of talking to government ministers on major policy issues.
An interesting small point was that the presenter John Humphries referred to the emails as being leaked – not stolen.
The sceptic (whose name I did not catch unfortunately) had by far the better of the discussion with Jonathan Porrit, one of the UK’s main cheerleaders for AGW.
It would appear that the BBC have finally started treating the story with some measure of their required impartiality.

December 4, 2009 12:45 am

English is not my native language, so there are many concepts I didn’t learn yet. Yesterday I learned a new word: ‘HIPSTER’. Hipster culture, and its huge spread since late 90’s, makes a lot of sense to me as, possibly, one of the main sources of public’s active support and belief in AGW. If hipsterism wasn’t so popular among young men and women as it is today, I bet the support in AGW and its ‘science’ wouldn’t be as strong as it is today. Simply because being anti-AGW is being eco-friendly, and being eco-friendly is ‘cool’!

December 4, 2009 12:49 am

Mr. Murphy
Your piece on Climategate was in my humble opinion the first piece of true Journalism from a Mainstream media outlet not just on this topic but on any topic seen in at least the last 10 years.

December 4, 2009 12:51 am

Rex at his best, he simply nailed it.
Maybe he can continue this during ‘Cross Country Checkup’ call-in show this weekend?

December 4, 2009 12:52 am

The CBC is in general very left, but Rex Murphy is not house trained like most there. Still I don’t think he could have done that without some internal support.
He is mostly ‘editorial content’ or talking to ‘phone in’ people on the radio. He has one of the best ‘pulses’ of English Canada, but then again, he is one of the few that speaks openly so that’s hard to be sure of. He is often able to present things in a way that cuts through the left/right smokescreen BS and get to the heart of the matter — no small feat.

December 4, 2009 12:53 am

Sir Muir Russell to head the Independent Review into the allegations against the Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

P Gosselin
December 4, 2009 12:55 am

A lie has to be repeated many times before it becomes “truth”. A truth needs to be exposed only once.
A few more reports like that on MSM, and the issue is is over! That is it’ll be back to square one and the debate begins.

Julian in Wales
December 4, 2009 12:56 am

tipping point?

December 4, 2009 12:56 am

there are so many ways this whole thing can go wrong, i dont know where to start… ;[ ’cause it wouldnt be the first time, an obvious lie ‘turns’ into truth.

December 4, 2009 12:57 am

A trusted voice of sanity for many CBC viewers. Let’s hope people take his advice and start actually investigating as opposed to gate keeping and spouting irrelevant figures that have been pressed upon them by those with a vested interest. Science, transparency, and objectivity above all.

December 4, 2009 12:58 am

Very impressive !
Well Done Rex! Now if the other so called journalists will take a hint and follow suit and actually do their job and make similar even handed reports in the other major media outlets. If not they will be co-conspirators and willful accomplishes in fraud, and accessories after the fact.
Edward R. Murrow went down in history as the man that stood up to the abuses of McCarthyism and won the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Rex Murphy I think Edward R. Murrow would be proud of you.
I tip my hat to you for a job well done!

December 4, 2009 1:00 am

This was a very nice report. To bad that overhere (Netherlands) it is still very much a non-issue. I think that the media is still waiting how it plays in the rest of the world.
The most funny thing i thought was that http://www.rt.com was one of the first stations that actually did some reports where you had a pro-warming and a sceptic discussing the problems, and i thought that it was strange that i had to depend on russian media for coverage 🙂

Rhys Jaggar
December 4, 2009 1:06 am

For some reason YouTube won’t work on Macs.
Any way of summarising this in words?

December 4, 2009 1:06 am

Nail, meet Mr Hammer.
I won’t hold my breath for something like this on the BBC

December 4, 2009 1:09 am

“The networks’ silence on ClimateGate is deafening. Scandal, cover-ups and conspiracy are the bread and butter of the media. Yet they have selectively and deliberately decided not to report this bombshell – or any of the incriminating details surrounding the scandal – because it goes against their left-wing agenda.
“To pretend this story simply doesn’t exist is damning to journalism. The so-called ‘news’ media are protecting scientists because it exposes their underbelly. That’s not journalism. That’s a cover-up. And we will continue to call them out for ignoring these allegations and the mounting, inconvenient evidence against them.”
media research centre

Kum Dollison
December 4, 2009 1:15 am

We need a couple of those, Stateside.

December 4, 2009 1:23 am

Listen guys,
the biggest economical decision of the humankind was supposed to be made partly on the basis of the CRU data.
If you really believe, that the the evidence is incriminating, somebody should file a criminal charge, before the whole thing is whitewashed.
This is also necessary for the sake of your own credibility. Web posts are nice, but RL actions are needed.

Methow Ken
December 4, 2009 1:29 am

This Rex Murphy editorial would have been great anywhere.
But to have the CBC put it on the air must surely amount to a major breech of what has effectively been an embargo on ClimateGate by the non-print MSM (or close to it, if count George S. on This Week and few other meager instances that very gingerly touched the subject).
The thing that makes me guardedly hopeful that the ClimateGate dam could break even in a large swath of the video MSM:
Probably even more important to most of the MSM than being politically correct, is the desperate fear of being (and being seen by the viewing public) as having been seriously ”left behind” on a major story. If the BASIC countries DO end up walking out in NoHopenhagen, that could break the dam; at least for any media organization that is not directly an arm of George Soros Inc, etc.

December 4, 2009 1:33 am

> That will be an interesting investigation. I wonder who will be
> appointed to provide an “impartial” report.
Probably Pachauri himself. After all, he’s the expert ….

December 4, 2009 1:36 am

Well spoken!

December 4, 2009 1:38 am

Excellent editorial form CBC. I woke up to news of the IPCC investigation on Radio Scotland this morning. The BBC have been complicit in trying to underplay Climategate for the past two weeks, presumably because they can’t get a refund on their flights to Copenhagen.
The world is changing. You would think that the warmers would be delighted that AGW seems less likely now than it was last month. But they would rather the world remained in imminent danger of “Thermageddon” than admit they might have got it all wrong.

December 4, 2009 1:54 am

An interesting segment in Newsnight from the BBC, uses a programmer to look at the source code.
11:45 mins into the vid.

December 4, 2009 1:55 am

Just speechless 😀

December 4, 2009 1:58 am

No wrath like a journalist (or politician) discovering they have been hoodwinked… and he’s right about the humor index of shows like Stewart. When the late night talk shows and the Comedy Channel political humor shows start making fun of you, it’s all over.
John Peter (00:33:00) : That will be an interesting investigation. I wonder who will be appointed to provide an “impartial” report.
The last rat off the ship? But seriously… remember that the IPCC is first and foremost a political body. Politicians often have a keen nose for when the cheese is over ripe and it’s time to start biting the hand that brought it to the cocktail party… Promise a politician anything, but never never lay a scandal near (or for the IPCC at) their door… The result of a scandal among politicians makes Roman Imperial family relations look positively cosy in comparison. (Nepotism is the insiders sharing booty with family members, is there a term for insiders killing off family members? A heck of a lot of “Emperor Wanabees” died at the hands of family and “friends”…)
So this could be the start of a coverup (or self posterior cover); or it could be a start of a lynching of the guys who showed up at the back room party with a narc … only time will tell. And it will be an interesting time.
FWIW, I’ve seen Rex a few times (he shows up on some of the satellite news programs, though frankly I’ve lost track of which one… I don’t think CBC in on the little dish so I think it’s other folks quoting snippets, but I surf so many news shows looking for an edge, it’s possible one of them is a CBC extract.) At any rate, he tends to get his facts straight and covers things with truth. As you may have noticed, he likes to give it to you straight too… A little old style… Did I mention I really really like my news a little old style? I’m going to have to see if I can find Rex on a more regular schedule somewhere…
At about 2:57 he has a marvelous scowl… I love it when a hard news guy is scowling at someone’s deceit. I always get the feeling that, after months of reporting “movie star has pet dog” they feel like they finally have a bit of what attracted them to reporting so many years before. One can only hope the rest of the reporters are feeling just a bit “left out of the fun”.

December 4, 2009 2:05 am

Wow. And powerfully presented.
Just wow.

December 4, 2009 2:08 am

Compare Rex Murphy with yesterday’s item on the BBC’s “Newsnight” program.
The Newsnight item
Starts 11 minutes 47 seconds into the program.
Ends at 21 minutes 23 seconds into the program.
Two weeks ago, I had never heard of Robert Watson, but the CRU data fraud disaster has smoked him out as Jone’s chief supporter at the UEA, and now he is all over the media and seems to be living in the Newsnight studio. Last night, the CRU’s climate program was condemned by a software engineer as something that “I don’t know what it’s doing, or why it’s doing it”. This was followed about two minutes later (I kid you not) by Robert Watson declaring that in spite of all that we have just heard about this joke of a computer program, the underlying message from the CRU is correct, the glaciers are melting, the sea levels are rising and the climate is warming, etc.
Watch, and wonder who are the deniers now?

December 4, 2009 2:09 am

Rhys Jaggar (01:06:16) :
Worked just fine on my Mac. My dilema is to either support Bill Gate’s company or a company with AlGore on board.

December 4, 2009 2:16 am

No Doug, it’s as left-wing as ever. However, Rex has always had a way of cutting through the political BS from both sides, and is probably the only non-biased journalist at the CBC, which is odd considering that he largely focuses on editorial content.
However, just to be clear for those that are unfamiliar with this organization, the Canadian Broadcasting Company (and its sister French language Radio Canada) are Canadian Crown Corporations that are largely funded by tax dollars. With the exception of Rex (and Don Cherry of Hockey Night in Canada fame), the CBC is a very left wing organization. Just as this aired tonight, one of the CBC News cable news channels is scheduled to show ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ for about the 30th time over the weekend.

December 4, 2009 2:26 am

Superb, I’ve put this on my blog.

December 4, 2009 2:30 am

The newsnight article is worth watching. The media are starting to ask the right questions.
My one concern is the repeated claim that HadCRU must be correct because it agrees with GISS and NOAA temperature records. Unless and until GISS and NOAH publish all of their raw data in full, and their algorithms, this “agreement” cannot be verified.

RC Saumarez
December 4, 2009 2:32 am

Newsnight is sticking their toes very gently in the water.
The only quote from “Harry_read_me” was “im an awful programmer” or words to that effect.
Why did they leave out some of the more damning phrases?

December 4, 2009 2:32 am

This is just fantastic stuff.
In the UK the government justified using tax payer propaganda to brain was people and most sinister of all children on the basis that “the science is settled”.
It clearly never was.

December 4, 2009 2:45 am

We have breakout!

December 4, 2009 2:50 am

finally the BBC has provided a “have your say” on climategate.
People should let them know exactly what we think of their unambiguous bias on this matter.

Neil McEvoy
December 4, 2009 2:55 am

The BBC has recognised that the dam has burst.
You can comment/recommend on their ‘Have Your Say’ topic on Climategate:

December 4, 2009 2:56 am

The UN announcement of an Investigation is as EM Smith said a purely policital move. That “investigation” is basically going to be sitting and waiting to see how things play out. If serious or even close to serious findings are found against CRU and the great un washed masses rebel against AGW, that UN investigation will gin out a report something like this:
“We are shocked and dismayed to find that these trusted and learned men have lied to us, we relied on the peer review process to get us the best scientific conclusions to make decisions in the best interests of the people of the world……” (For those on the Team notice that others can use the “peer reviewed” club to bash you over the head with that you oh so helpfully created.)
If they feel that the Greenwash is plausible enough the UN report will gin out something like this.
“Our Independent investigation of the claims agains the UEA CRU, along with other independent reviews, has found that even though the scientists themselves conducted themselves poorly their science is sound and the debate on AGW is now and should be forever closed. We need now to work even harder to overcome this delay into implementing…”

Leon Brozyna
December 4, 2009 2:56 am

Put that in your Intro to Journalism textbook as a first rate example of even-handed editorializing. This is first-rate quality stuff.

December 4, 2009 2:57 am

Climategate fallout:
Clive Crook, senior editor of The Atlantic Monthly and former deputy editor of The Economist:
” The closed-mindedness of these supposed men of science, their willingness to go to any lengths to defend a preconceived message, is surprising even to me. ”
UN body wants probe of climate e-mail row:
Results 1 – 10 of about 28,600,000 for climategate

December 4, 2009 3:01 am

ClimateGate – humanity endangered?
SpaceGate – “axis of evil”; universe as we know it is the next !
“In 2005, astronomers discovered a mysterious alignment of hot and cold spots in the CMB, which they dubbed the “axis of evil”. If the phenomenon is real, it has important implications for our understanding of the universe. The Planck data will be used to test it. But imagine if cosmologists find another, similar, mystery buried in the data. What will they use to test that one?”
Cosmologists are in a paradoxical situation. They strive to acquire data of the highest possible quality to constrain parameters of their models as quickly as possible. But they should be open to NEW FEATURES IN THE DATA THAT ARE NOT PREDICTED BY CURRENT MODELS, and hence to the possibility of having to devise new models and test their predictions….
We therefore propose that such ultimate data sets be treated as the precious resources they are and released slowly and carefully.
Man (Mann) we are all doomed!

December 4, 2009 3:04 am

First honest reporting by a media icon. WOW!!
A revolt by journalists to report THE NEWS?
PS It’s going to snow along the northern gulf of Mexico.

December 4, 2009 3:05 am

It’s great that the BBC have finally got around to acknowledging the CRU scandal and maybe some there are waking up to news that’s history! And it’s great that finally we, the sceptics, have something big on the warmists. However, let’s keep our feet on the ground. We really need this green line to go down if we are indeed correct in our belief that carbon dioxide is not the warmer that some believe it is. http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/execute.csh?amsutemps+002 If it doesn’t then it’s us that will be defensive this time next year. However, make hay…

December 4, 2009 3:10 am

This did air, right? No joke?
Well done, and I couldn’t agree more….

Patrick Davis
December 4, 2009 3:20 am

I wonder when we’ll see same in the Australian MSM. Monday? PAH! They’ll still be talking about Tiger Woods bonking some other woman…..
KRudd747, Mzzzz wRong and Mzzzz Gillard are on their jollie trip to a cold Copenhagen.

Cold Englishman
December 4, 2009 3:20 am

Meanwhile Pugh the intrepid explorer is at it again; Having fixed the arctic ice, he’s trying something new. If want a laugh try this:-
“Well, I’ve changed gears.  Now I am off to Mount Everest.  But bear (sic) with me. I’m neither an “adventurer” nor a tree hugger. I am a new breed of hands-on, act-now activist.
As a maritime lawyer, I have decided to combine my legal skills with a deep commitment to get my message through to decision makers and the media to achieve change within our lifetime. Because I’m not sure there will be another.
Next step – Mt Everest
So in April I will undertaking a swim in a glacial lake under the summit of Mount Everest.  As a result of global warming, temperatures in the Himalayas have risen by 1 degree Celsius and glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world.  Scientists predict they could disappear within 25 years.
These glaciers are not just ice. They are a lifeline – they provide water to a fifth of the world’s population. It’s essential that politicians put aside their differences and agree a bold strategy to reduce climate change to below current levels when they meet in Copenhagen at the end of the year. There is not time for delay. ”
As they say “You couldn’t make it up”.

Expat in France
December 4, 2009 3:35 am

At the risk of straying off topic, those in the UK should tune into Radio 2 at 12:00 today (The Jeremy Vine show). One of the subjects for discussion will be Climategate (hate that term!!).
So, if you are of a mind to, ring in or Email the programme. Every little helps (as the Tesco ads say…).

December 4, 2009 3:35 am

Finally the London (UK) Times has an climategate email story with extracts from the emails, annotated with comments from the ‘move along there, nothing to see’ crowd.
From Times Online
December 2, 2009
“E-mails that set climate sceptics buzzing”

Perry Debell
December 4, 2009 3:39 am

Alec J (00:41:11) :
It was Prof Philip Stott who was interviewed by John Humphries. Prof Stott has an excellent site and it’s very well worth reading all his past reports.
Best wishes,

Bruce Martin
December 4, 2009 3:39 am

Another first. ClimateGate was the lead item on Australia’s ABC tonight. It only took 2 weeks.

December 4, 2009 3:43 am

There is another thoughtful piece in the Spectator (a UK weekly magazine about politics and current news).
“On global warming, we seek to be the still, small voice of calm. As Maurizio Morabito says on page XIII, the truth about global warming is that our understanding of it is in its infancy. Before we tax the poor out of the sky and off the roads, before we slow the world’s economy in a way that will condemn millions to poverty, we should ask just what all this will achieve. Ask precisely where the doubts are. Because after reading the views of the scientists below, no one can argue that the debate is over.”

Robert of Canada
December 4, 2009 3:44 am

Rex Murpheyis a skeptic (by nature) The CBC finally let him loose; he is a very influential columnist in Canada.

December 4, 2009 3:44 am

Off Topic: BBC Radio 2 Conducting public phone-in discussion on Climategate at noon (Uk Time) today. I think the number is: 0500 298291 – I will correct this if it is wrong!
Anyone interested in furnishing them with an opinion?

Sam the Skeptic
December 4, 2009 3:46 am

“Sir Muir Russell to head the Independent Review into the allegations against the Climatic Research Unit (CRU)”
Good choice I would say. Enough University experience to know what his witnesses are talking about but far enough away from the problem to provide some confidence that he’ll be objective. (Though having been a Principal he may just be part of the “community”. I hope not.)
He was a very effective PS at the Scottish Executive and highly thought of.
[For the benefit of our American friends, a Permanent Secretary is the Civil Service Head of a Ministry as opposed to the political head. As PS at the Scottish Exercutive he was top top dog, so to speak. Boss-man of the whole thing.)

December 4, 2009 3:48 am

To virtualy everyone in the debate outside the science community this is back to the age old issue of left versus right.
Using climate change science methodology I present my thesis.
I smell bullshit and I suspect the Left are responsible for the Bullshit. I research the Bullshit and indeed find evidence of the manufacture of Bullshit by the worlds biggest Bullshitters.
Bullshit deniers are suppressed by Bullshit notably by the left wing organ the BBC (British Bullshit corporation).
In history the left wing bullshit has proved to be wrong on nearly every occassion.Thus.
Without any scientific device,training or equipment I can safely say man made Climate change is in fact….Bullshit

Robert of Canada
December 4, 2009 3:48 am

Paul Vaughan (00:09:43) :
No Vaughan, they held their breath and hoped it would all go away. I’m sure I wan’t the only one to write a letter to the CBC. It got to the point that “man in the street” held up a placard behind a live CBC news broadcast telling the CBC to rportthe story.

December 4, 2009 3:49 am

Rhys Jaggar (01:06:16) :
For some reason YouTube won’t work on Macs.
Any way of summarising this in words?
Here’s the direct CBC link that should be running sometime this morning:

December 4, 2009 3:52 am

It is turning and accelerating. DId anyone just see Morning Joe on CNBC? Joe Scarborough just said it looks like AGW is a “religion”. The dumb guest said all the scientists can’t be wrong, but yet it is right for that the head guy stepped down. I was screaming, for VICTORY of TRUTH, so loud in joy I woke my poor wife up!!!! What a telling interview.

December 4, 2009 3:55 am

Some good recommended links on his site as well (right side):
I honestly think a lot of journalists have thought of the skeptical viewpoint to be somewhat akin to intelligent design stuff, and have therefore never actually looked at it. As more people look, the story grows.

December 4, 2009 3:56 am

I’ve been waiting with anticipation for Rex to comment on this issue ever since it broke. Unfortunately Rex usually only does a piece on The National once a week and the prior week’s was regretably wasted on the Afghan detainee non-issue here in Canada. However, in retrospect the timing was perfect. It gave Rex a chance to digest the enormity of what Climate-Gate means and articulate that to the Canadian masses just before Nopenhagen. Rex did not disappoint!
Rex has also done other good work on this file in the past. Do a search on YouTube for Rex Murphy climate and you’ll get several past pieces on the climate he’s done.
Rex also does the occasional opinion piece for the Globe and Mail which has yet to cover this issue from a new perspective (they’ve had one opionion piece). I hope to see Rex’s written comment on the matter there as well!

December 4, 2009 3:59 am

(from same link)
I’ve been following the great Climategate controversy, and it presents an opportunity to salute the leadership of two Canadians in this tempestuous arena.
Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick may turn out to be something of reluctant heroes in the global warming story. They’ve been doing the backstop work amid the hurricane of scare stories and over-hyped speculation that marks this whole debate.
McIntyre, in particular, through his blog Climate Audit, has been tireless in doing what all good, inquiring minds should do when investigating new terrain; asking for the data, checking others’ results, keeping up the intellectual standards of the quest.
For this, in the main, they have been scorned and put off by the global warming establishment, had their credentials questions, and their work mainly ignored.
There is no reason Steve McIntyre should not be at least as well known on the subject of global warming as David Suzuki, but it is one of the oddities of the global warming debate that only the leaders of the orthodoxy are household names. The tough questioners are outside the spotlight.
It was also this duo who unmasked the great hockey stick graph as being the product of inadequate or twisted data and removed it as the great logo of the global warming stampede.
You can find a sample of McKitrick’s work here, and for McIntyre, go to climateaudit.org, one of the most honest sites on global warming and its statistical basis on the whole internet.
A few years back, McKitrick also published a (now) prescient book with Christopher Essex entitled Taken by Storm: The Troubled Science, Policy and Politics of Global Warming.

December 4, 2009 4:03 am

BBC Radio 2 Phone-in on Climategate UPDATE Correction Telephone number is : 0500 288 291

Watt Tyler
December 4, 2009 4:06 am

There was a report on climategate on SKY TV News today in the UK. However, it was followed by a story about Nepal, and how the government had definite proof that Global Warming was happening (as they would).
SKY have really been going hard on the AGW propoganda this week. You still need to cancel your subscriptions.

December 4, 2009 4:08 am

This makes me proud; to be able to say that I am a Canadian. Rex Murphy is a very intelligent man. He was a Rhodes Scholar. I am really starting to believe that when it comes to Copenhagen, the reports from the CBC are going to be much more honest than we have been used to. Maybe its too much to expect a bias towards us skeptics, but we can always hope.

December 4, 2009 4:14 am

A fellow Newfoundlander, I had the opportunity to introduce myself to Rex after a speaking event at Memorial University.
An awe-inspiring intelect.
Rex does not represent the CBC. He doesn’t call up any science reporter in the CBC to get his info. This is totally his work. Rex is becoming iconic in Canada for his perspectives and people would pursue Rex if he ever left.
Google “Rex Murphy Climate” to find the other things he has said on environmental issues. It is all worth listening to.

JB Williamson
December 4, 2009 4:16 am

Rhys Jaggar (01:06:16) : said
“For some reason YouTube won’t work on Macs.”
Works perfectly on all our macs!
On the BBC 4 radio this morning a very good analogy was made regarding the IPCC.
The IPCC is an aggregator of scientific research, and stands at the bottom of an inverted pyramid. If the credibility of the aggregator is destroyed then the whole edifice comes crashing down. Prof Philip Stott of London Uni.
Listen to
2 hrs 10 mins into the program.
See more about Philip Stott here:

Expat in France
December 4, 2009 4:22 am

On second thoughts, having persevered with the first ten minutes, even this looks like being a whitewash, with little opportunity for true, knowledgeable sceptics to get their oar in. With Mark Linus (?) a climate “expert” (?) (who won’t shut up) in the studio, and Vine really not strong enough I doubt if we’ll get anywhere. They’re putting too much emphasis on the one controversial Phil Jones E mail, and disregarding the rest. Oh dear…

December 4, 2009 4:23 am

That was easily the best editorial on this subject in the video media to date.
And on CBC!
The turning point has arrived…I’ve never been more hopeful for my field than I am today.

December 4, 2009 4:23 am

All Canadians should take a moment out of their day to thanks that scant majority of Newfoundlanders who, in 1949, voted by the slimmest of margins to shed their British imperial yoke to join the Canadian confederation!!!
And we got Rex as OUR National Treasure.
Lard tunderin’ jaysus, Rex, you tells em now!
My favourite Newfie joke:
While out picking blueberries, the one lad says to the other,
“Don’t pick the red’uns; they’s green!”

December 4, 2009 4:25 am

“Climate science has been shown to be, in part, a sub-branch of climate politics”
This right on the nail and has got huge exposure worldwide. Fantastic.
Is it really two weeks since this all came out? On one hand it seems like ages on the other like it was just a few days ago. I feel as if Christmas came early for skeptics.

December 4, 2009 4:31 am

Rode trip? To Copenhaggen?
Ask Canadian Environment Minister Prentice:
“If you are a government official heading to Copenhagen soon for the climate summit, you are probably wondering what the hell you’re supposed to think now.”
“Climategate fallout”

December 4, 2009 4:47 am

Meanwhile, here in Australia the TV news programmes are still running alarmist stories of how tropical diseases are certain to spread into temperate zones, the tundras are melting, the Himalayas are melting, and the warming seas are guaranteed to turn ordinarily even-tempered sharks into vexed-beyond-reason, angry, menacing monsters; yet interviewers on Lateline, the leading serious current affairs programme of the ABC (or, as I have taken to calling it, Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide) have the hide to ask government representatives whether the failure of the Government’s Emissions Trading Scheme might not give the Opposition the opportunity to run a [cue scary music] scare campaign!
I tell you, there is not a single TV news show tonight across all commercial and publicly-funded channels which had not featured the phrase, “proof of global warming!”

December 4, 2009 4:54 am

That was pretty potent stuff. Is there another topic that Rex Murphy has taken a stand on that has led to serious consequences?

Dave Longley
December 4, 2009 4:57 am

I too was surprise, but pleased, to hear the BBC report on this on this mornings Today programme with a degree of impartiality they don’t usually show on this subject. Here’s hoping it continues.

Stephen Shorland
December 4, 2009 4:59 am

Very good Mr Murphy. Anyone can see that all of science is at stake if these agenda driven,post-normalists are allowed to continue.

December 4, 2009 4:59 am

An update on the melting of the Himalayas: a British report on Australian news tonight reveals that last spring there was melting ice, and this week, climbers on the Himalayas were beset, astonishingly, by unpleasant, inclement weather which forced them to climb back down the mountain! (They had to decline.)

December 4, 2009 5:14 am

The beautiful thing about speaking the truth is that it can be done so clearly and concisely. It is only when we attempt to spread half truths and lies that we must do so with obfuscation and ‘wordsmithing’. My hat’s off to Mr. Murphy.

December 4, 2009 5:15 am

@Rhys Jaggar Just make sure you have the correct version of the flash player to play in real time. There is also a add-on to Firefox that will download the flv file. VLC (freeware) can play these after you have saved them

December 4, 2009 5:16 am

As Cold Englishman reports above, you just have to read this http://go2.wordpress.com/?id=725X1342&site=wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewispugh.com%2F to see what the definition of a complete idiot is!

Stephen Shorland
December 4, 2009 5:17 am

Alec J (00:41:11) :
BBC R4 Today programme Fri morning carried a ten minute slot on Climategate in their flagship 08:10 slot. This is usually the preserve of talking to government ministers on major policy issues.
An interesting small point was that the presenter John Humphries referred to the emails as being leaked – not stolen.
The sceptic (whose name I did not catch unfortunately) had by far the better of the discussion with Jonathan Porrit, one of the UK’s main cheerleaders for AGW.
It would appear that the BBC have finally started treating the story with some measure of their required impartiality.
The sceptic was professor Stott,I’m fairly sure.You can see him in ‘the great global warming swindle’ on youtube.One thing I did notice in Murphy’s editorial: He still wants Climate Science to be collated by a body of some kind.This was also in Hulme’s of UEA thoughts and Ravetz.Some type of citizen’s panel! Who will drive the opinions of those therein? Hulme/Ravetz and others of the original conspiracy. Remember their strategy rolled out in plain sight.

December 4, 2009 5:18 am

@Deadman And after that it was downhill from there I would imagine.

December 4, 2009 5:20 am

It is amazing what some people will let slide when the conclusions agree with their viewpoint!

December 4, 2009 5:20 am

IS it possible to take Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize and give it to the individual(s) who leaked the emails and code?

December 4, 2009 5:30 am

Barry Garber: Climategate? What Climategate?
It includes these wise words:

… they complain that the material used to debunk man-caused global warming is “selective.” Well, yes! If investigators have a thousand e-mails and only one says, “Natasha admitted she shot the prime minister as he was leaving the brothel,” isn’t our use of that testimony selective? How far will the defense get complaining that there are 999 e-mails that do not implicate Natasha?

December 4, 2009 5:45 am

Lest anyone thinks this is over, think again. With some $145 TRILLION in wealth transfer in the balance, they will not slip quietly into the night.
I heard one on TV this AM say well it’s just a few bad scientists, but the science behind the AGW(FRAUD) is sound. Sure, it’s sound if you look at the ‘peer reviewed’ stacked deck.
What is now needed is an open science approach to this FRAUD. Where all scientists with something to say, have their say.

dave ward
December 4, 2009 5:50 am

I’ve just made a comment on the BBC “Have Your Say” page, but I note that it currently has a total of 919 comments, 683 awaiting moderation, 226 published, and 10 rejected!

December 4, 2009 6:03 am

ONE international is sending emails all over the web. once you click the link in the invitation, you sign their petition. you can sign as many times as you want by just clicking, which i find to be in bad taste.
for more info visit http://one.org/international/actnow/copenhagen/index.html?rc=copenhagenconfemail
and pls write about this ongoing unfair effort. thanks

December 4, 2009 6:04 am

Our Mr Murphy is about as true and honest an individual as you will ever encounter. I am heartened by his thoughts on this matter. One can only hope that his lone words, from within the very bastion of global warming advocacy media in Canada, will cause all Canadians to take pause and pay heed.

December 4, 2009 6:10 am

(Nepotism is the insiders sharing booty with family members, is there a term for insiders killing off family members? A heck of a lot of “Emperor Wanabees” died at the hands of family and “friends”…)

I think the term fratricide would fit in this case.
There is about to be a stampede to see who can throw the most people under the bus and be the last man standing. When things turn ugly in a political organization actions become very self serving, and aimed at personal political survival above all else.
Now is when folks will start to trot out memo’s they wrote 2 years ago that indicated obliquely that they were uncomfortable with some aspect of the science, or that they took on faith that they were getting good info from someone else and there for it is their fault, the key words will be something something “I trusted them” etc. etc.

December 4, 2009 6:28 am

This is significant. The official position at the CBC (aka government funded Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, aka “Pravda”) was always “global warming is real, it’s proven, ice caps are melting, we’re all gonna die unless we do what we’re told, etc. etc.” I am not however convinced that even a respected commentator like Mr Murphy will be able to tear down the wall at the CBC. But I’m hopeful. 🙂

December 4, 2009 6:45 am

I’ve typed out the entire transcript of Rex Murphy’s editorial. Also included are Jon Stewart’s video clip and an earlier Rex Murphy editorial ripping environmentalists.

Roger Knights
December 4, 2009 6:54 am

“Sure, it’s sound if you look at the ‘peer reviewed’ stacked deck.”
Here’s a phrase: “cheers reviewed”

Gail Combs
December 4, 2009 7:09 am

Absolutely great piece of journalism. That is how a journalist is supposed to act. Thank you Rex.
illya (01:23:09) :said
“…If you really believe, that the the evidence is incriminating, somebody should file a criminal charge, before the whole thing is whitewashed…”
The lawsuits are coming but first the extent of the fraud needs to be found. That is what the first lawsuit by Chris Horner (Freedom of Information) is about. Also it is best not to appear as money grubbing and greedy. I and many of those here would like to see prison time for these people who have knowingly defrauded us.
I found this on one site:
” Al Gore, Barack Obama, and the Climate Change Gang are attempting to defraud the United States government and the American people out of potentially trillions of dollars through the use of a now proven scam called “Climate Change”.
This is a violation of US law.
Those found liable for attempting to defraud the United States government through the use of FALSE CLAIMS can be forced to pay TRIPLE DAMAGES in compensation for all monies lost through use of those FALSE CLAIMS.
Can you say “Class Action Lawsuit”?
§ 3729. False claims
(a) Liability for Certain Acts.— Any person who—
(1) knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, to an officer or employee of the United States Government or a member of the Armed Forces of the United States a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval;
(2) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement to get a false or fraudulent claim paid or approved by the Government;…
(7) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement to conceal, avoid, or decrease an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government,
is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000, plus 3 times the amount of damages which the Government sustains because of the act of that person, except that if the court finds that—

Unfortunately we are individuals and not UN organized NGOs so it will take a while to get our acts together. Besides the US government has to bring charges and what democrat is going to bring charges against Al Gore, the Clintons, Obama and the democratic party as a whole?
Any lawyers out there? Could a state bring suit?

Sean Peake
December 4, 2009 7:23 am

Rex is the only sane and balanced voice left at the CBC since the passing of Peter Gzowski (I still miss him). A rapier wit with a strong BS detector.

December 4, 2009 7:26 am

pwl … OOoohh. Rex always publishes the text of his editorials. Bummer you typed it out. Will look for it.

Fred from Canuckistan . . .
December 4, 2009 7:26 am

The CBC News organization sat on the story for two weeks . . . a full embargo. We have been hammering away at our politicians and the CBC “ombudsman over this news crime.
Best summary is Kate’s Dec 3rd entry
“The Bottle Genie”
comments are revealing.

Ian L. McQueen
December 4, 2009 7:30 am

Bravo Rex! Makes me proud to be Canadian.
Too bad that the CBC (along with nearly all media) has actively been pushing the AGW line. Along with yet another presentation of AIT on CBC TV this weekend, the CBC radio airwaves have had repeated promos for the Saturday science show Quirks and Quarks (noon; can be heard live in four successive time zones via http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ or later as a webcast). The program will feature melting ice, rising oceans, and other climatic horrors that we just know threaten our way of life.
I almost feel sorry for the people who so steadfastly promote this AGW story without ever checking the underlying facts. I predict a future epidemic of sunken foreheads resulting from one person after another repeatedly slapping that part of the anatomy as they realize how thay have been “took”.

December 4, 2009 7:32 am

As a man from the rock myself I very much appreciated Rex today. I think he is finally seeing the light. But why does he stay with the CBC I wonder?

John Galt
December 4, 2009 7:45 am

Here’s the MSM coverage on this in the local rag
Friday, Dec 4, 2009
Posted on Wed, Dec. 02, 2009
‘Climategate’ e-mails heat up debate but don’t prove that Earth isn’t warming
Sorry to burst the balloons of global warming skeptics out there: Cli- mategate is a dud.
Sure, it’s a catchy title, implying that a huge conspiracy surrounds the hundreds upon hundreds of e-mails that were reportedly hacked and recently released from the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in England.
And in a handful of those e-mails, scientists friendly to the notion that global warming is occurring appeared ready to delete or otherwise obfuscate evidence that might have contradicted their theories. In short, they were haughty scientists behaving badly.
But in reacting to this development, some people have leaped to absurd conclusions.
The first is that this incident “proves” climate change is not occurring.
The second is that it shows there’s no need for the world’s political leaders to take bold action at the upcoming Climate Conference in Copenhagen, aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Wrong. And wrong.
The furor over the e-mails hasn’t changed the central reality:
The overwhelming preponderance of evidence from scientific research from around the world indicates global warming is a reality, and manmade emissions have played a role in climate changes.
It would be irresponsible for President Barack Obama and other world leaders — especially those from China, India and other rapidly developing countries — to use a manufactured scandal as an excuse for inaction on global warming.
The evidence
Skeptics poring over the released e-mails are looking for evidence that scientists contributing to the Climatic Research Unit over the past two decades have somehow conspired to twist data so it shows only one thing — global warming is happening.
But in reality, many of the e-mails include attempts by scientists to challenge others’ work and to more rigorously examine the data. Plus, reputable groups outside the Climatic Research Unit have been involved in similar research for years. They include the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Japan Meteorological Agency.
For example, NASA lists several factoids on its website (climate.nasa.gov) regarding climate change. They include:
•Levels of carbon dioxide are higher than at any time in the past 650,000 years.
•Global sea levels and global surface air temperatures have been on an upward trend (yes, with a few yearly declines mixed in there as well).
The Antarctic report
This week, the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research released what it called “the first comprehensive review” of Antarctica’s climate, based on the work of 100 scientists from eight nations.
Responsibly, the group wanted to make sure leaders in Copenhagen would have more complete information before making decisions that could result in spending billions of dollars to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
Not all the report’s findings were doom and gloom. In fact, the study is a prime example of how scientists must approach the topic of climate change.
For instance, the authors concluded that the manmade ozone hole over Antarctica had actually shielded much of the continent from the effects of global warming. And that sea ice was increasing in parts of the continent.
But the report also said carbon dioxide levels were rising at an “unprecedented” rate and the continent is predicted to warm by slightly more than 5 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100.
Copenhagen and the future
The effects of the leaked e-mails could be felt many ways.
In the long term, scientists doing climate research should be more open about how they get their data and how they draw their conclusions. That could make the complicated issue more understandable to the public.
It is the short-term impact of the incident that hangs in the balance, though.
As we noted, it’s clear that the United States and other countries should continue pursuing the best ways to set goals for reducing harmful greenhouse gases.
It would be disastrous if a few e-mails traded among some imperious scientists could derail essential efforts to deal with global warming.
© 2009 Kansas City Star and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. http://www.kansascity.com

December 4, 2009 8:12 am

Back in 2005, the CBC broadcasted “Global warming : Doomsday Cancelled”, a true skeptical documentary:

Since then they have embraced AlGorism.

John in L du B
December 4, 2009 8:59 am

I agree.
Rex is honest and courageous, but the CBC is heavily invested in David Suzuki through his “Nature of Things” science show and are in a serious conficted of interest when reporting on climate change.
Not sure that Rex can outlast a seriously biased news agency like the CBC.

December 4, 2009 9:03 am

I have sent the CBC editorial to several people and places. I was waiting for the right one, and that piece is superb.
I sent it to PBS, pointing out they had totally ignored it while reporting really newsworthy stuff such as “greenhouse gasses hit an all time high”. On the day of the Australian rejection, they ran a long special which blamed a local Australian drought on greenhouse gas.

December 4, 2009 9:18 am

I’m shocked that the CBC didn’t announce they were giving Suzuki an entire hour to rebut what Rex said.
But the CBC is broadcasting the sci-fi film “An Inconvenient Fantasy” on Sunday at 10pm and in case you miss it, again at 1 am.

matt v.
December 4, 2009 9:23 am

The fine German researcher Dr Keenlyside told the public way back in 2008 that global temperatures would stay the same for a decade at least [See BBC article dated May 1 2008 by Richard Black http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7376301.stm
M.LATIF another german climate modeler said mmuch the same earlier this year.
One of the e-mails include in the CRU set released to the public was
A January 5, 2009 e-mail from Phil Jones to Tim Johns , “Folland, Chris”, Subject:Re Temperatures in 2009
I only quote the first part of the e-mail
Tim, Chris,
I hope you’re not right about the lack of warming lasting till about 2020. I’d rather hoped to see the earlier Met Office press release with Doug’s paper that said something like-half the years to 2014 would exceed the warmest year currently on record, 1998…
So it would appear that CRU really did not know when global warming will start if ever but only” hoped.” Global warming is still on hold for another decade and probably 2-3 decades . We have had no significant warming for the last decade. So it looks like no warming for at least 20 years. So where is all the global warming that all the scientists claim is so unequivocal?
The truth of the matter is that global temperatures will remain stable for decades to come. So why all the panic and phony taxes and cap and trade rules. Let’s stop the current IPCC scientific nonsense and do it right. We have the time.

R Stevenson
December 4, 2009 9:32 am

The simple fact is, CO2 does not cause global warming. A misconception is that because CO2 absorbs long wave radiation in the band 12 to 18 microns it is sufficient to cause run-away warming. This is not true as the majority (70 to 90%) of Earth’s radiation at 15 to 25 C lies in the band 7 to 12 microns and escapes into space. This remains true for higher concentrations of CO2 in air.
The UK media (BBC, The Guardian etc) have largely ignored or glossed over the emails, dismissing them as loose talk between fellow scientists. It is refeshing to see this CBC clip from Alex Murphy.

December 4, 2009 9:43 am

I knew once CBC gave him the go ahead, Rex Murphy would come through. He, along with Stephen McIntyre, need to get the Order of Canada.

December 4, 2009 9:51 am

Was this broadcast on Dec 3rd ? If so, the video should be available this morning on CBC’s website but it’s not there. Instead we get the “filler” clip of Rex telling us the video will be available the day after the broadcast. Hoping this is a technical problem and not suppression.

December 4, 2009 9:53 am

This is great. It seems that our National Radio & TV corporation (in Canada) is taking the line for real science. I can’t wait to see what Harper will do this weekend at the summit… this surely gives him good reasons for not signing anything… one could almost suspect that the position of CBC/RC is coming from him… but let’s give credence to the journalists (some seem to want to redeem themselves).

David Ball
December 4, 2009 9:59 am

Anthony Watts and Watts Up With That?, climate sciences “reset button”, ….. David Suzuki will be having a conniption on his private island. He thought he had control of Canada’s politics and the CBC. Go Rex !!!

Dave Johnson
December 4, 2009 10:09 am

The BBC website “Have Your Say Section” has a question inviting you to respond to a question on “Climategate” and Copenhagen. The comments are overwhelmingly in favour of the sceptical viewpoint and wonder of wonders one of their environment correspondents actually admitted on radio that the science isn’t “settled” after all!

December 4, 2009 10:34 am

“Wow, just wow.”
Ditto that.

December 4, 2009 10:41 am

John Galt,
First, I am not a ‘scientist’. I am a generalist, with interests in lots of areas and I see most everything as following orderly laws; not chaos. I do not reject keeping our home as clean as we reasonably can. That is an individual responsibility. When mandated upon the entire populations of the earth, as a political control mechanism, I reject that 100%.
Where is the proof that CO2 is a “green house gas”. ‘Scientists’ have been screaming that for so many years, it is like telling us the earth is flat. Eventually evidence showed that to be false. Look how FAR we’ve come.
AGW “science” screams about 0.8*C rise in 157 years, after we’ve spewed, what Giga-tons of CO2 into the atmosphere? Just exactly how stable does “science” believe the surface temperature of the earth SHOULD remain – as ‘you’ tell us that life has ‘evolved’ over billions (wish I could type in Carl Sagan speak) of years. Was the MWP caused by a fractional degree of rise? Are Ice Ages caused by fractions degree drop? If so, I think you have uncovered absolute proof of the existence of the Intelligent Designer; we live on a razor’s edge, in perfect balance between two tipping points; freezing or frying – and have done so for ‘billions’ of years, long before science, or Gore.
Maybe science looks at the earth as a machine, but as a simplified version of reality. The complexity is beyond a fortunate balancing act, but is of dynamic servo systems, responding in ways ‘you’ have ignored.
President Obama is quite probably the most corrupt US president in HIStory. He is purposely pushing the USA into a total collapse of the US economy – hard to reason anything but. I tried borrowing money to get out of debt, but that doesn’t work; will he listen to me? He and his band of worshipers of Saul Alinsky, MAO, whoever hated Liberty… The elitist, university educated lawyer.politicians have been taught this BS in the universities, which spew the liberal/progressive agenda. Obama looks down on the very Constitution, which he swore oathes to defend, as a document which is flawed at it’s very core. He entered office (as senator and as president), commencing with the swearing of an oath of office – as a liar!
The US government just now, told us that unemployment rose by only 11,000 last month; but if you wait for the rest of the ‘data’, it turns to be more lies and manipulations of data. The old saying “Figures don’t lie, but liars do figure.” remains true and poinient.
Obama’s trillion dollar “stimulus” works so well, the percentage of ‘black’ American males, who are unemployed, exceeds the percentage of ‘black’ American children murdered in the womb. (57:50) And they are his voting base… expendable tools – worshipers of no consequence.
The power greedy animals, who prowl the globe, spewing thousands of tons of CO2 in every trip, holding parties, huddling in secret and stealing the lives and properties of the peons, are not to be trusted.
If Obama says “we must”, I say NO! If he says this, or that is exceptional, I say it is mundane. If he says “the sky is falling!”, I say he is creating another disaster opportunity, with which they can ratchet away more of our unalienable rights.
There seem to be no political “leaders”. Anything that looks like a progressive cannot be trusted to lead a family of ducks across the White House lawn – AND Obama looks like a progressive.
Those who align themselves with evil and it’s agendas, cannot be trusted. The kind of agenda the progressives are pushing, is not saving the planet, but dominating it. Their “utopia” is well enough described at http://www.georgiaguidestones.com
Scientists, who allow themselves to become tools of a political agenda, are no longer scientists, but tools. Expendable tools.

December 4, 2009 10:42 am

Dave UK (03:48:00) :
Sorry, Dave UK, but I don’t know what you are talking about. I can’t smell a thing.

December 4, 2009 11:02 am

According to the G&T paper, cited on another thread, if you put a teakettle on a burner, it will cool, not warm, the burner. And, by analogy, if you put an atmosphere on a planet, it will cool, not warm, the surface.
The moon has no atmosphere, and it has a daytime mean surface temperature of
107°C (with a max of 123°C ).
I.e., the atmosphere, and in particular, the “greenhouse gasses” in the atmosphere, are NOT heating the surface, which would be a lot hotter in their absence. They merely slow the loss of the heat. But it is still lost.
From the very first I suspected something was amiss with AGW, simply because it gets cold at night.

December 4, 2009 11:46 am
December 4, 2009 11:59 am

I’m not sure the impact of this editorial is fully appreciated by non-Canadians. The CBC is a left leaning media organization and for them to air this is significant by itself. The National is probably one of the most watched news programs on Canadian television and airs coast to coast. Rex Murphy’s piece on the National is quite popular and he certainly is not considered a right wing hack.

Paul Vaughan
December 4, 2009 12:28 pm

This is symbolically important:
RDay (09:18:45) “CBC […] giving Suzuki an entire hour to rebut what Rex said.”
Anthony, Moderators, All,
I suggest WUWT shine a very bright light on the rebuttal.

Many people grew up watching Suzuki, so for many he is instinctively an authority figure. Someone strong needs to bear a potentially disheartening message about Santa Claus. When people slip into hysterical rants during interviews, suspicions are aroused. Suzuki is not capable of being objective on this file. Better checks & balances are needed to ensure that fantasy stops trumping truth. I oppose toxic pollution and support natural forests, but engineering climate fantasies to achieve ends on these fronts undermines credibility. For the sake of the environmental movement in Canada & elsewhere, a Canadian of at least equal stature needs to stand up firmly to Suzuki. I would suggest that the most effective strategy (in this case) would be to do so in a respectful manner, as the goal is not to preach to the choir. I am more than suspicious that those opposed to the real environmental movement (i.e. not the climate non-issue ruse) are propping Suzuki up on purpose, as his misguided antics are very “helpful” to them.
Note to some of the Canadian Conservatives who’ve posted: I’m glad Harper is better at strategy than you. (No offense intended – you probably agree.)

December 4, 2009 1:45 pm

Good for Rex Murphy.
I hope they now make a documentary about people like McIntyre, Lindzen and the countless other HONEST people & scientists who were courageous enough to speak up about this for so long – risking their careers and being ostracized by family and friends.
I have seen it happen personally – so I know what a huge price these people paid when they spoke out. Imagine being Richard Lindzen at MIT where Susan Hockfield (MIT President) has been running around making Chicken Little presentations and speeches for years!!
Please RESIGN SUSAN HOCKFIELD – your academic intellectual integrity is in tatters ….you have NO business representing the illustrious academic Massachusetts Institute of Technology – you have been shown to be a fraud!
Here is an example of Susan’s typical statements in a whole multitude (dozens) of speeches, where she talks about the Climate Change Boogey Monster and the next sentence is “we need more R&D Energy related funding” – pretty obvious what is going on here:
We are likely only decades away, at best, from the point of no return on greenhouse gas concentrations.

Chris Schoneveld
December 4, 2009 1:56 pm

Mark Fawcett (00:28:42) :
“Now that’s a piece of journalism – even-toned, eloquent, measured and objective.”
Indeed, but equally eloquent and measured is this interview with Prof Aynsley Kellow on on Australian radio (ABC Counterpoint). Highly recommended!!
Kellow is Professor and Head of the School of Government at the University of Tasmania. Expert reviewer for the the United Nation’s IPPC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change and Key Vulnerabilities

December 4, 2009 2:21 pm

The first bell has finally rung.
I, my family, my country (USA) and the world are indebted to you, Mr. Murphy.
Simply masterful.

December 4, 2009 2:48 pm

Hey, Deadman
You forgot the starving penguin chicks! Yep, on out most trustworthy (not) ABC yesterday I heard a story about penguin chicks who starved because their parents had to go further to find food and that this was possibly due to climate change.

Antonio San
December 4, 2009 3:26 pm

The Canadian Globe and Mail is unrepentent as their headline on their coverage of Copenhagen shows:
“Ahead of Copenhagen
Your first stop for climate change information
Read features from Globe correspondents, watch video from the Munk Debates and visit often for breaking news on global warming”
REALLY? Globe and Mail web editors took two weeks to release anything remotely talking about Climategate…
Their environment reporter Martin Mittelstead story about birds has a blatant lie in it (Robins have names in Eskimo contrary to what he writes…)
the Globe NEVER brings attention to any scientific article that is not an alarmist PR job from AP Borenstein or some other Canadian Press activists.
the Globe never offered any detail reporting on the CONTENT of CRUgate emails and documents and the consequences,
And now the Globe want us to believe we’ll get balanced information about Global Warming from THEM?
Perfect match with Mann and Team no?

Gary Hladik
December 4, 2009 4:38 pm

Jeff in Ctown (Canada) (05:20:36) : “It is amazing what some people will let slide when the conclusions agree with their viewpoint!”
Unfortunately no, it isn’t.

Ray, Toronto
December 4, 2009 5:14 pm

Man ….Rex is so cool
“Most men only care for science so far as they get a living by it, but they will worship error when it affords them a subsistence.”
Goethe (early 1800’s)

December 4, 2009 7:50 pm

look he is right but lets not forget what the problem is. Right now they keep saying ‘The world has warmed’*
* ( if you exclude the medieval warm period and start your calculations at 1850 )
What we as skeptics need to say is continually that fine the world appears to have warmed but that does not equate cause and effect to CO2. Period. Correlation does not mean causation. These emails were at least an explanation, the code was revealing, yes we need an investigation, but they still all have each others backs. No one has broken ranks and no one is likely to break ranks because based on the temperatures and glacier melts they are right. The world has warmed since 1850.
As a skeptic I invite them to prove that CO2 is the cause. Please do not correlate the data, I don’t care if they both go up, technically the same could be said of the polar bear but I don’t see them being blames for global warming… I still say it is the fur causing the ice to melt… SHOW ME A FEEDBACK LOOP. Not the explanation of what one might look at such as Colin Powell’s mobile chemical weapons depots presented to the UN. Anyone can draw a diagram. The physical evidence that it is occurring, temperature may be included of course just not entire explanation.
Kudos for saying get back to science. Now lets do so.

December 4, 2009 11:33 pm

The old statistics example:
What is the correlation between church attendence and beer consumption?
Sample Data:
Church attendence increased over the time period
Beer consumption increased over the same time period
Do church goers tend to drink more beer?
Do beer drinkers tend to go to church?
The missing data: change in population.
As population increases, there are more people to attend church AND there are more people to drink beer. (still don’t know if the same people do both.)

December 5, 2009 4:14 am

Climategate: The Science is Scuttled

December 5, 2009 5:04 am

For those outside the UK, the confrontation between Prof. Watson and Mr. Morano can be viewed at http://www.the-daily-politics.com/2009/12/climategate-newsnight-4th-dec-2009.html.

December 5, 2009 5:09 am

Numberwatch has come up with this U-tube which, now that I can breath normally again, I thought I’d share here:
[we don’t post that Hitler parody youtube video here – not going to stoop to “deniers” level]

Grant Carlson
December 5, 2009 6:31 am

This superb editorial is getting international attention, and so it should.
What makes it especially satisfying is that it’s coming from the CBC, the usual epitome of the mushy left.
Is this a sign that that they’ve finally decided to get involved in the real world? We can only hope.

Paul Vaughan
December 5, 2009 11:05 am

Grant Carlson (06:31:20) “What makes it especially satisfying is that it’s coming from the CBC, the usual epitome of the mushy left.”
Are you suggesting they’re waking up to realize they’re dirty pawns of the “big oil” they so love to “protest”?
The air sure went out of this tire. The interesting discussions about natural climate variation are deep in the rear-view mirror.

December 5, 2009 1:51 pm

‘ debreuil (00:52:57) :
The CBC is in general very left, but Rex Murphy is not house trained like most there.”
You’re a whackjob. CBC is by far the most objective news source in Canada and one of the most objective in the world. You’re visiting too many loony sites that see a political bent in everything that doesnt kowtow to your its subjective whims and ideologies.
Scientists behaving badly isn’t left or right. The ozone hole didn’t belong to a party. Grow up, your partisanship is showing and and its not good for your cause.

December 5, 2009 1:56 pm

” RDay (09:18:45) :
I’m shocked that the CBC didn’t announce they were giving Suzuki an entire hour to rebut what Rex said.
But the CBC is broadcasting the sci-fi film “An Inconvenient Fantasy” on Sunday at 10pm and in case you miss it, again at 1 am.”
Why are you shocked? Please list all proven examples of bias you have gathered as evidence. You don’t have any, os that won’t happen. Figment of your imagination. A fantasy.
All documentaries are aired twice. Are you implying that long established practice is something specific to An Inconvenient Truth? If so, you are a [snip, means mistaken ~ ctm]
[snip] like you think “bias” is only airing YOUR opinion.

December 5, 2009 2:01 pm

“This is significant. The official position at the CBC (aka government funded Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, aka “Pravda”) was always “global warming is real, it’s proven, ice caps are melting, we’re all gonna die unless we do what we’re told, etc. etc.” I am not however convinced that even a respected commentator like Mr Murphy will be able to tear down the wall at the CBC. But I’m hopeful. :-)”
You’re a [snip], hurling criminal insinuations. The CBC is TAX funded – accountable to the citizens, not corporations – and not government controlled. The government has NO control over content. In fact, successive governments of all political leanings are constantly frustrated at the CBC’s tenacious exposure of their behaviour.
Reply: Change your tone or post elsewhere. First and Last warning. ~ ctm

December 5, 2009 2:04 pm

[snip – your political rant is not welcome here, plus your email address is bogus – policy violation – you were warned – banned -A]

Grant Carlson
December 5, 2009 2:05 pm

“You’re a whackjob”
This is so sadly typical of the left wingers. When reality conflicts with their deeply held beliefs they revert to schoolyard taunts. It’s why they should never be taken too seriously, except as a threat to our security and incomes.
As to the CBC being “objective”, this is a silly belief that only a juvenile lefty could claim.

December 5, 2009 2:06 pm

Hmm I wonder if ed happens to work in customer service at the CBC.
For fun go to small dead animals and read the extra long comments thread where the people reading that blog all complained to the CBC for lack of coverage and the what became the autoresponse letter fromt he CBC ombudsman.

Grant Carlson
December 5, 2009 2:17 pm

“I am not however convinced that even a respected commentator like Mr Murphy will be able to tear down the wall at the CBC. But I’m hopeful. :-)”
It’s possible that Rex Murphy was hired as a token right winger, as a ‘character’ with oddly held beliefs.
But over the years the stature of Rex Murphy has grown while the reputation of the rest of them, one the same as the next, has gone nowhere.

December 5, 2009 3:14 pm

Hurrah for Rex! Right on the mark as usual. A Rhodes scholar no less.

matt v.
December 5, 2009 4:32 pm
fred houpt
December 5, 2009 4:43 pm

Hoorah for Rex Murphy and the CBC. Rex is arguably one of Canada’s most articulate and brightest journalists and it is always with pleasure that one listens to his bon mots and verbal jousts. You go get’em Rex.

December 5, 2009 5:03 pm

I am very pleased that someone at the CBC has finally come out and discussed this matter. The CBC seems to think it knows what is best for us and therefore tends to pick and choose what it thinks we should hear. It has taken far to long. This is going to be the scandle of the century!!!
Way to go Rex.

bill davidson
December 6, 2009 3:29 pm

Rex is not a climate scientist.
Data has not be lost. Check the facts. That is but one fallacy he promotes.
His misinterpretation of the facts are incorrect. Because he says it so sarcastically, articulately and rudely does not make it true.
You are hoodwinked by bafflegab.

Grant Carlson
December 6, 2009 3:52 pm

It’s good to hear from a climate scientist like yourself, Bill Davidson, who can possibly bring clarity to this situation.
My understanding, and that of most observers of this ongoing controversy, was that the data upon which much of the dire predictions were based was indeed lost.
Where did you find it?

December 6, 2009 3:54 pm

bill davidson (15:29:58) :
“Rex is not a climate scientist.”
I’m not a banker, but I can spot a Phishing scam when I see one.
This just in:
OK, everyone out of the water, pool’s closed.

December 6, 2009 4:38 pm

Getting flipping tired of this Artic cooling below 49*N.
4:30PM and 19*F, expected low of 6*F.
Monday, high 14*F and low 2*F.
How the Artic Ice does not freeze deep, with significantly colder 40* farther North? Maybe new, broad conveyor currents, with colder water flowing toward equator and warmer surface waters flowing North – rotting (if true) the insulating layer of ice from below?

Chris Hirst
December 6, 2009 7:02 pm

Way to go, Rex.
I normally can’t stand him but his unfortunate tendency to righteous indignation was on the mark in this case. I agree with some commenters that this data may not be as important as some have made it out to be. But that missed the point. The significance of climategate is how corrupted the science of climate change has become. That was the thrust of Rex’s talk.
We DO need a reset of this whole matter. The idea of going ahead with mandated CO2 cuts is grossly premature at this point. As a Canadian, I’m glad that Obama has basically zero chance of getting the Senate to sign off on it now.
If the re-do shows the AGW thesis is correct, then I will be full square behind it. I lean towards the AGW thesis now and have been a supporter in the past. Lately, however, I have started to wonder about it.
Science needs to be transparent before its policy implications can be fairly discussed.

December 14, 2009 8:22 pm

I wouldn’t put too much stock in Rex Murphy’s understanding of the issue. He has long been a global warming skeptic. However, in this particular exposes himself as nothing more than an opportunistic talking head with no more journalistic integrity than those found on FOX news.
The climate-gate emails have caused the accuracy of the climate models to come into question, and Rex uses this as a basis to attack the science behind global warming. He implies that climate scientists are alarmists and are exploiting public fears by making dire predictions of future warming. To quote him, “Climate-gate is evidence that the science has gone to bed with advocacy” and “Climate science has been shown to be a sub-branch of climate politics”. I wonder if he realizes the irony of these statements?
If he had bothered to do his homework he would have realized that the computer models in question, and also the IPCC projections have historically underestimated rates of warming and sea level rise:
As for the rest of his sensationalist musings, such as his somewhat lazy usage of the catchphrase ‘hide the decline’ (again taken out of context), its obvious he himself did not read the emails, nor understand them if he did. Instead he goes on to reinforce doubt on the scientific consensus, which has long been the strategy of corporate interests in [snip]
To draw parallels [snip] Further, most of the skeptics often cite each other and their (non-peer reviewed) studies to support their claims. If you look into their funding sources they are primarily from oil & gas or filtered through front organizations; all of whom advocate the need for ‘sound science’. This strategy is well documented here:
Another example of this strategy being implemented was [snip] Are you starting to notice a pattern?
As per loss of the data, here is the original statement (which has also been ‘cherry-picked’ and misrepresented) for your perusal:
“Since the 1980s, we have merged the data we have received into existing series or begun new ones, so it is impossible to say if all stations within a particular country or if all of an individual record should be freely available. Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e. quality controlled and homogenized) data.”
Thus the original data has not been destroyed, but rather amended, compiled and updated. In fact, when discussing the ‘adjustments for homogeneity issues’, this included the ‘weeding out’ of sites affected by the ‘urban heat island effect’, long touted as a source of inaccuracy in the models by skeptics (hence the term ‘quality controlled’).
The original data has not been destroyed, in fact it is still available from various meteorological organizations. However, I assume climate skeptics will not bother to cross check the (freely available) data because they are well aware that this would prove nothing more than that these issues are distractions designed to delay legislation and protect corporate profits. Their strategy is not to produce valid science, nor advocate the scientific method but rather to undermine and cast doubt upon it.
In short, Rex Murphy is an idiot…
[Reply: objectionable rants about deniers, the tobacco industry and other non-issues snipped. Tone it down. ~dbs, mod.]

December 14, 2009 8:58 pm

When they have no way to refute a message they don’t like, they will attack whoever bears that message. And the more truth that message contains that exposes them for the frauds they are, the more savage is their attack.

David Lawton
December 15, 2009 3:20 am

wonderful comments all. However….! If Rex Murphy were a black man would you call him the n-word? No. So why are people so comfortable calling him and the rest of us Newfoundlanders ”Newfies”.
We don’t like it. It’s derogatory. It conjures up images of stupidity and incompetence. By the tone of your comments I don’t think Rex fits that image. Neither do the rest of us!

Grant Carlson
December 15, 2009 5:24 am

“I wouldn’t put too much stock in Rex Murphy’s understanding of the issue. He has long been a global warming skeptic”.
Whereas you bought into the program the moment you heard about it, right guest123434q?
Every decade or two there’ll be charlatans pushing one catastrophe or another, all under the guise of caring for our futures, and the gullible will buy right into it. The trouble is, as always, that they want to drag the rest of society along with them.

December 16, 2009 9:59 am

This blog has an excellent explanation of why Rex Murphy is so out to lunch on this particular topic, and guilty of misleading the public by quoting the emails out of context.

January 10, 2010 5:05 pm

Bravo! Now what about the rest of the msm? They should start all new networks with folks like this.

January 18, 2010 4:04 pm

And it was fear of the climate science thugs that prompted the wimpy G&M to kick Rex off their Saturday pages and send him to the NP. How long before the lefty cbc does the same?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights