The Inquiry Team

Comments

[Phillip Bratby]

Great cartoon

[Bill S]

This is all going way too fast for this poor west coast American.
I'm still trying to figure out if "they have no biscuits at all" is a valid excuse
for "hiding the decline".

[John Silver]

Bil S:

It's not cricket.

[John Silver]

I mean the meaning of the cartoon.

[John Silver]

And I'm not British.

[Stonyground]

I always think that the best cartoons are the ones where it takes several seconds before the penny drops and you get it, for this reason I am a fan of Gary Larson. This was one such moment, "Eh..............oh yeah the hockey sticks ha ha ha ha ha"

[Thomas Hobbes]

careful your grace, they're coming for you

http://freedom-2-choose.blogspot.com/2010/02/id-cards-for-internet-users.html

7:20 to 7:40

[Paul]

Bleughhhh. Sick bags can be found at the exit of this theatre.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00qll1r

[microdave]

@ Stonyground - my thoughts exactly.

[geronimo]

I was assured that Sir Muir was a mandarin of the highest probity with a degree in Physics. Now I'm not sure we haven't got a Lord Hutton. I knew Jim Norton in a past life, he's an establishment man, excellent ethics, but quite unable to take a "rock the boat" position.

I have come to the conclusion that Sir Muir doesn't know of the existence of the blogosphere and has decided upon one of those impeccable Sir Humphrey whitewashes a priori blithely unaware that his every move is being followed by millions of people worldwide. How else could he have chosed the editor of the journal that published the "trick" and broke its own rules be refusing to make authors provide access to the data and methods to others interested in their finding. Add to that Geoffrey Boulton an unreformed warmist of the extreme kind and a sense of Sir Muir's unworldliness begins to overwhelm me.

As the enquriy, quite rightly in my view, isn't about the scientific conclusions with regard to global warming he could easily have chosen scientists from any other discipline who would have looked coolly at the evidence of scientific malfeasance, witholding of data, perversion of the peer review process, personal attacks on opponents etc. that abound in the emails. They could also have spoken to the provenance of data and the notes in the Harry file.