Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace


Barry - I am not quite sure of your line of logic here.

Are you perhaps suggesting that any alleged criminal with a wife and family who is under immense pressure (perhaps while still being idolised by the rest of his gang) should be immune from prosecution?

Or are you suggesting that only those who transgress the law in support of what they consider to be a worthy cause should be immune from prosecution - provided of course they are married and feeling under immense prosecution?

If so, are Peter Gleick and Phil Jones to be regarded as equally special cases here (and more so than a less educated individual who only manages to persuade your bank to pay a few pounds towards his living expenses?

Or is Peter Gleick to be considered as more of a special case than Phil, because he made an early admission of guilt?

(And if so, how sure are you that he has come completely clean over his whole involvement, or do you think more facts might emerge if an investigation were to be carried out?)

I would feel more inclined to support your viewpoint were we all convinced that Gleick had come absolutely clean over the full extent of his involvement, were the mainstream media and senior scientists unanimous in their condemnation of this sort of behaviour, and were it widely recognised that facts had been distorted.

It didn't happen with UEA and it hasn't happened with Gleick. For those reasons alone, if for no other, it may be worthwhile invoking the full force of the law.

Feb 24, 2012 at 12:31 AM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

Weird story on junkscience about EPA scrubbing Gleich in their grant database

Feb 23, 2012 at 11:55 PM | Unregistered Commenterharold

FBI means nothing good. he has a wife and family and is under massive pressure. hope people recognise that - someone tell morano. to stop now

Feb 23, 2012 at 11:49 PM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

This does not mean anything will come of it but this article says the FBI has been having discussions with Heartland:

However, trying to get the FBI involved does not mean they will take it seriously or that prosecution will result. I have my hopes but also ample doubts.

Feb 23, 2012 at 10:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterSkiphil

Gleick story makes it on to the Beeb:

Climategate revisited. When private documents taken from a climate-skeptic think tank last week revealed the organisation’s funding sources and future plans, environmentalists thought they had a riposte to the famous Climategate emails. But that sense of triumph has turned sour when a leading environmentalist, Peter Gleick, admitted this week to using deception to obtain the documents. President of the American Geophysical Union Michael McPhaden explains why they publically repudiated Dr Gleick. And Bob Ward of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment evaluates the harm done.

Feb 23, 2012 at 9:11 PM | Unregistered CommenterTurning Tide

Please check this out and if you agree that it is dreadful, please send it to all your contacts. Implore them to do the same. PLEASE.

Feb 23, 2012 at 7:36 PM | Unregistered Commenterpesadia

Thanks matthu. Monckton is worth reading just for his command of English. I particularly liked "the relentlessly malevolent and consequently uninfluential Desmogblog". Chortle...

Feb 23, 2012 at 7:05 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

Christopher Monckton gives this insight after holding a discussion with a UK Government Minister (without revealing which one):

The Minister indicated – in effect, and with scarcely-concealed regret – that the party line set by David Cameron in response to various opinion polls, focus groups and other such artifices for identifying and following a consensus rather than setting a lead, and not the objective scientific and economic truth, was likely to remain the basis of UK climate policy.

In reality, orders issued to our elected nominal “government” by the hated, unelected Kommissars of the EU, our true government, who have exclusive competence to decide and dictate the UK’s environment and climate policies, are and will remain the basis of UK climate policy, regardless of what (or whether) Cameron and his vapid focus groups think (if “think” is the right word).

Feb 23, 2012 at 6:08 PM | Unregistered Commentermatthu

Any estimates on what the sea-level would be when it meets the expanding red-giant?

It sounds like one of those "O" level (sorry GCE) maths questions of my youth!!!!

Feb 23, 2012 at 4:48 PM | Unregistered CommenterRetired Dave

The death of peak oil seems to have been exaggerated...


I liked Orlowski’s comment that the doomsayers ‘simply wanted Doomsday a little too badly’.
It probably won’t do hairshirt sales much good, either.

Feb 23, 2012 at 4:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterJames P

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>