Stringer, who is on the UK Parliamentary Science and Technology Committee, described the Oxburgh “inquiry” as follows:
The Vice Chancellor of the University of East Anglia seemed to share Deer’s desire to get at the truth when he announced an independent review which would “reassess the science and make sure there is nothing wrong”.
Lord Oxburgh who was appointed to chair this panel, disappointed everybody. He explained that the Vice Chancellor was new and did not understand what he had promised. He soon made it clear that he would not reassess the science but he was just going to satisfy himself as to the integrity of the scientists. After a cosy chat with the Climatic Research Unit scientists he decided that they were decent chaps.
Interestingly however following a Freedom of Information Request notes taken by one of the panellists, Professor Kelly from the University of Cambridge, indicated that while there was no “blatant malpractice” it was impossible to show that the Climatic Research Unit scientists had not cherry picked their statistics.
He thought their methodology was “turning centuries of science on its head”. Oxburgh also quietly damned the climate team by saying “it is very surprising that research in an area that depends so heavily on statistical methods has not been carried out in close collaboration with professional statisticians”
This is the equivalent of claiming medical competence whilst operating on a patient without an anaesthetist.
He eviscerates the execrable Muir Russell, describing his report as “almost beyond parody” (almost exactly echoing Clive Crook’s words on the Penn State “inquiry”):
The other review carried out by Sir Muir Russell, a Civil Servant responsible for overseeing the huge over expenditure of the Scottish Parliament building, had even greater resonance with Deer’s concern about the accused investigating themselves. His review was charged with looking at the e-mails themselves. One of the main charges against Professor Jones was that he deleted e-mails that would show he was up to no good scientifically.
In a situation that is almost beyond parody Muir Russell stated that he didn’t ask Jones whether he had deleted the e-mails because they would have had to interview Jones under caution. What was the solution then? The Vice Chancellor asked Jones whether he had deleted the e-mails. This rather negated the purpose of having an independent Inquiry when the only person to ask the crucial question was the Vice Chancellor who saw his prime responsibility to the good name of the University. The accused investigating themselves again.
The release of the unit’s e-mails from the and the accusations that followed demanded independent and objective scrutiny of the science by independent panels. This did not happen.