Legal analysis
A law professor from the University of Pennsylvania has dissected the global warming consensus and found it to be an empty shell, as Lawrence Solomon reports:
The cross-examination, carried out by Jason Scott Johnston, Professor and Director of the Program on Law, Environment and Economy at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, found that “on virtually every major issue in climate change science, the [reports of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] and other summarizing work by leading climate establishment scientists have adopted various rhetorical strategies that seem to systematically conceal or minimize what appear to be fundamental scientific uncertainties or even disagreements.”
Professor Johnson, who expressed surprise that the case for global warming was so weak, systematically examined the claims made in IPCC publications and other similar work by leading climate establishment scientists and compared them with what is found in the peer-edited climate science literature. He found that the climate establishment does not follow the scientific method. Instead, it “seems overall to comprise an effort to marshal evidence in favor of a predetermined policy preference.”
The 79-page document, which effectively eviscerates the case for man-made global warming, can be found here.
Doesn’t tell me anything we haven’t suspected all along…
Read it here. (h/t WUWT)
Australian Climate Madness 
If the matter of AGW put to a test in Court it would not even pass the Civil standard of proof (balance of probabilities) and thats a FACT (see the findings of the good Professor for starters). What amazes me is that the governments of the world are willing to risk global financial destruction based on such poor evidence.
What it does tell you is the lamestream media is complicit in refusing to make people aware of these serious issues. They are failing the populace.