Almost none of Oxburgh’s testimony to the Science and technology Committee can be taken at face value. Even on something as simple as climate background of Lisa Graumlich and Kerry Emanuel, Oxburgh’s statements to the committee were untrue.
The Oxburgh report stated that the eleven papers listed in their bibliography had been “selected on the advice of the Royal Society”. This assertion was immediately criticized at Andrew Montford’s and here. The Oxburgh Report’s claim that the papers had been selected “on the advice of the Royal Society” can be said with almost total […]
The Guardian’s story on Oxburgh’s testimony (James Randerson here) is headlined: Oxburgh: UEA vice-chancellor was wrong to tell MPs he would investigate climate research and sub-headlined: Edward Acton gave ‘inaccurate’ information to MPs by telling them the university would reassess key scientific papers following the UEA climate emails controversy. And indeed, this is one of […]
In response to a question asking Oxburgh about criticisms that the report – all five of pages of it – appeared “rushed and superficial”, Oxburgh described how the panel had patiently stayed in Norwich to see the project through. Oxburgh (my approximate transcript at about 10:51 time on program): After we had done all the […]
Notice of the Oxburgh hearing is here at 10.30 am UK time ( 5.30 am Eastern). The Science and Technology Committee will hold an oral evidence session following-up to the previous committee’s report on the disclosure of climate data from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia. The session will be on […]
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.
Excellent commentary by Roger Harrabin here. Phil Willis, former Chair of the COmmons Science & Technology Committee has harsh words for the UEA, saying that when he “couldn’t believe it” when he learned that the university had tricked them. Willis described the UEA’s trick as “sleight of hand“.
One inquiry into Climategate by a non-skeptic is not a total whitewash. Fred Pearce actually read the emails and makes some important findings.
A bombshell from the Oxburgh “inquiry”.
It’s hard to restrain snark when considering an email like the following: Oxburgh – “We all understood how and why this happened”. OK, then wouldn’t it have been worthwhile reporting how and why this happened? Isn’t that would inquiries are supposed to do? Oxburgh: “it’s just not fair to blame this on CRU!” Boo hoo. […]
