If website documents are accurate (and they are supposed to be comprehensive), Muir Russell did not meet with Jones, Briffa or Osborn on any occasion subsequent to the press conference on Feb 11, 2010 unveiling the Muir Russell panel – other than perhaps crossing paths at the March 1 Parliamentary hearings.
Tag Archives: muir russell
The more one reads the documents of the Muir Russell, the more it is a litany of incompetence, already evidenced by the failure of Muir Russell and other panelists to even attend the Jones and Briffa interview. The botched “efforts” to examine the balance of the emails in the back-up server is another sorry episode.
It will take a while to parse Muir Russell. They’ve been working on it for 7 months and I’ve had it for a day. I’m going to place up notes on things as I notice them. At some point, I’ll try to pull together a longer response, but there are lots of interesting things as […]
Were some of you waiting with interest to the BP analysis of CRU email promised in the March 20, 2010 meeting of the Muir Russell Team – see here
Fred Pearce, whose one-man inquiry into Climategate (The Climate Files), remains the only reasonably objective inquiry to date observes here that nobody on the Muir Russell panel even asked Phil Jones whether he deleted emails” Most seriously, it finds “evidence that emails might have been deleted in order to make them unavailable should a subsequent […]
One of the most famous emails was Jones’ request to Mann, Briffa, Wahl and Ammann to delete AR4 emails (including the surreptitious Wahl-Briffa exchange) a day after David Holland’s FOI request for AR4 emails. It read: 29th May 2008: ―Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do […]
Pielke Jr is off the mark quickly with a demonstration of an important Muir Russell misunderstanding of IPCC responsibilities, that invalidates much of their work on IPCC. (BTW it seems clear to me that Muir Russell contains many gaffes and errors, which are going to get placed into the sunshine over the next few days, […]
Here is Ross McKitrick’s first quick response. Readers need to remember that the Muir Russell report has been months in the preparation and that we’ve seen it for only a few hours (while fielding some media requests as well). It will take a little while to assimilate.
Muir Russell said that it wasn’t the scientists weren’t to blame for defamatory language in emails, e.g. calling people “frauds”, “fraudit”, “bozos”, “morons” and so on. It was Microsoft’s fault. They asked: Indeed, some submissions have characterised them as ‗unprofessional‘, or as evidence of CRU‘s contribution to a ‗poisoned atmosphere‘ in climate science. Muir Russell […]
I guess the main question coming out of the Muir Russell report is when is he going to be appointed to the House of Lords and his choice of appelation. Lord Muir of Holyrood? They adopted a unique inquiry process in which they interviewed only one side – CRU. As a result, the report is […]