Nothing to see here
Robyn Williams is the ABC’s science correspondent and a fully paid-up alarmist. And guess what, despite not having read the Climategate emails himself, decides, based on comments from alarmist journals, that they have no effect whatsoever on the alarmist cause. There’s a surprise:
So what do the emails reveal? I hesitate to pronounce. I haven’t read them. Instead, I called those who have, such as Fred Pearce from New Scientist. He said, in an NS editorial, that any suggestion the informal emails formally compromise the science is ‘ludicrous’. (I broadcast Pearce on The Science Show last week). The Economist, always rigorous in its analysis of major issues, said much the same.
The journal Nature, with its immense and authoritative record surveying the science scene over hundreds of years said this about any ‘fraud’,:
“This paranoid interpretation would be laughable were it not for the fact that obstructionist politicians in the US Senate will probably use it next year as an excuse to stiffen their opposition to the country’s much needed climate bill. Nothing in the e-mails undermines the scientific case that global warming is real – or that human activities are almost certainly the cause. That case is supported by multiple, robust lines of evidence, including several that are completely independent of the climate reconstructions debated in the e-mails.” [The kind of language used in this paragraph demonstrates perfectly that Nature is no longer a science journal that can ever be taken seriously – Ed]
This last point is exactly the one with which I led in that discussion following Swindle on ABC TV. The evidence resembles that of a murder case. The detective finds 20 separate leads all pointing to the same villain.
I suggest you read the emails. And then think again about whether the alteration of data, hiding of inconvenient facts, threatening journals that publish inconvenient papers and deleting emails in response to FOI requests is what transparent science is all about.
With journalists like Williams on the case, no wonder the Australian public doesn’t hear anything about climategate from the ABC.
Read it here.
P.S. And if you want more evidence of alarmist journalists playing down Climategate, see AP’s Seth Borenstein being hauled over the coals here.
Australian Climate Madness 
It would be a pointless waste of time for Williams to read the emails. For a start, if there were any natural curiosity about a subject on which he declares himself to be an expert, he would already have taken the time to do his own investigation.
Sounds to me like denial on his part: “Don’t try and confuse me with facts, my mind is made up”. Much like the hapless Greenpeace apparatchik comprehensively skewered by Christopher Monckton in this video:
The Science Show has always been a very conservative programme highlighting the views of mainstream science and giving little credence to fringe or unorthodox ideas. Much of its content seems to come from the popular science journal “New Scientist”. This journal is full of “mays and possiblys” ie researchers may have found a link between co2 and ### (insert alarmist scenario). The high priests of the religion of science such as Richard Dawkins often feature in The Science Show.
I almost fell off my chair earlier this year when “The Science Show” ran a balanced feature on near death experiences, not the usual whitewash of contrary ideas. (this is anothe area where evidence sems to outweigh the accepted science). In reflection this feature may be related to Mr Williams recent brush with mortality?
Robyn WIlliams was hired to MC the national rural health conference this year, which I attended. I thought we were all going to discuss something to do with health, but many of the sessions (it even came up in a plenary session) were about climate change. Amazingly, in one session it was put forward that climate change was going to increase temperature by 9degrees C. WTF? Then anyone in attendance was able to put forward policy on how to deal with the issue, which was then duly submitted to the government under the auspices of the National Rural Health Alliance which has many ties with DoHA (Department of health and ageing). So anyone in the room could submit policy. Random medical students or nurses or pharmacists or just interested parties could submit policy on climate change and health.
Are you angry about this obvious fraud and the national media’s complicity in the cover-up, misinformation, reframing and misdirection of the issue? Take responsibility and take action. STOP all donations to the political party(s) responsible for this fraud. STOP donations to all environmental groups which funded this Global Warming propaganda campaign with our money, especially The Environmental Defense Fund. They have violated the public trust. KEEP donations local, close to home. MAKE donations to Oklahoma’s Senator Inhofe, the only politician to stand firmly against this obvious government/media coordinated information operation (propaganda) targeted at its own people. People that government leaders and employees are sworn to protect. WRITE your state and federal representatives demanding wall to wall investigations of government sponsored funding and coordination of this and related propaganda campaigns and demand indictments of those responsible. WRITE your state and federal Attorneys General demanding Al Gore and others conducting Global Warming/Climate Change racketeering and mail fraud operations be brought to justice, indicted, tried, convicted and jailed. Carbon is the stuff of life. He (Obama) who controls carbon, especially CO2, controls the world. Think of the consequences if you do nothing! For one, the UK is becoming the poster child for George Orwell’s “1984” and the US government’s sponsorship of this worldwide Global Warming propaganda campaign puts it in a class with the failed Soviet Union’s relentless violation of the basic human right to truthful government generated information. Given ClimateGate’s burgeoning revelations of outrageous government misconduct and massive covert misinformation, what are the chances that this Administration’s National Health Care sales campaign is anywhere near the truth?