Muir Russell reported Briffa’s claim that “Wahl was asked for comment on text as a knowledgeable and objective arbiter”. The indolent Muir Russell did not comment on whether Briffa’s description of Wahl as “objective” was plausible. In a Climategate letter of July 27, 2006, Wahl wrote to Briffa (733. 1155402164.txt): I’ve also been a lot […]
Tag Archives: muir russell
One of my long-standing concerns of Climate Audit and its readers has been a concern over the role of Eugene Wahl in changing the IPCC assessment of the McMc-Mann dispute in the Final Report – a role that Fred Pearce described in The Climate Files as a “subversion” of IPCC policies of openness and transparency. […]
In preparation for his appearance at the SciTech Committee, Muir Russell has, at the last possible minute, attempted to cooper up his webpage by amending the list of FOI requests to include the David Holland FOI request for off-balance-sheet IPCC review comments that prompted Phil Jones’ notorious delete-all-emails request. Amazingly, this request had been left […]
Andrew Montford’s review of the Climategate Inquiries is released today and is online here. Ross McKitrick’s is online here.
Shortly after the release of the Muir Russell report, I criticized their wrongheaded and untrue finding that there had not been an outstanding FOI request at the time of the notorious Jones’ request to delete all emails seeking information on IPCC correspondence that, in Fred Pearce’s words, was a ‘subversion” of IPCC policy on openness […]
At the close of Boulton’s April 9 interview with CRU, the only such interview relevant to the proxy reconstruction controversies that constitute 99% of the Climategate emails, Boulton asked CRU to comment on Ross McKitrick’s National Post op ed last October during Yamal. The response was given to Muir Russell on or after June 16 […]
The Muir Russell panel blatantly misrepresented the facts surrounding Jones’ notorious request to “delete all emails”, a misrepresentation that, in my opinion, was done, at a minimum, either recklessly or out of gross negligence.
In the Guardian debate, George Monbiot’s opening question (made in good faith on his part) pertained to CRUTEM, George noting that the inquiry had been able to derive a CRUTEM-like result from GHCN data and challenging me that this had somehow rebutted my “crusade” on this point. I tried to deal with this as quickly […]
Sitting on the dais at the Guardian panel, it seemed to me that the most remarkable moment came when the audience laughed out loud at Trevor Davies about Muir Russell.
Bishop Hill has cheered up readers with Josh’s cartoons. Josh has started a blog as an album of his climate cartoons here. Here is his most recent entitled The Three Stooges – two lords and an aspiring lord (now merely a sir) – Muir Russell, Oxburgh and Acton.