A British report released Wednesday on the "Climate-gate" scandal criticizes a key group of scientists for lack of transparency and other problems with how they presented their data, but it concludes that their underlying scientific work is sound -- and one of the top scientists is getting his job back. Climate change experts at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit found themselves under intense scrutiny in November when over 1,000 internal e-mails were obtained and uploaded to the Web by hackers. Some climate change skeptics accused the scientists of manipulating data to suppress evidence. But the new report on the scandal found that the experts' overall "rigor and honesty as scientists are not in doubt." The report was requested and paid for by the university, and the panel that conducted the investigation was led by Muir Russell, a retired civil servant and educator...more
Thursday, July 08, 2010
British Panel Criticizes 'Climate-gate' Scientists but Clears Them of Bias
A British report released Wednesday on the "Climate-gate" scandal criticizes a key group of scientists for lack of transparency and other problems with how they presented their data, but it concludes that their underlying scientific work is sound -- and one of the top scientists is getting his job back. Climate change experts at the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit found themselves under intense scrutiny in November when over 1,000 internal e-mails were obtained and uploaded to the Web by hackers. Some climate change skeptics accused the scientists of manipulating data to suppress evidence. But the new report on the scandal found that the experts' overall "rigor and honesty as scientists are not in doubt." The report was requested and paid for by the university, and the panel that conducted the investigation was led by Muir Russell, a retired civil servant and educator...more
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
So, let me see if I have this right. The university at the center of the scandal had an internal review and said they are not guilty and should be believed next time they come up with something from doctored data????
I think you've provided a nice summary of the situation.
Post a Comment