UN IPCC to investigate CRU

Rajendra Pachauri at French political rally
(AP Photo/Francois Mori)

In yet more evidence that the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) consensus might be unraveling, the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has now announced its own investigation into the allegations raised by the CRU Archive.

IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri, who before had said that nothing in the e-mails changed what he called the "fact" of AGW, now says, in an interview with BBC Radio 4, that the allegations are serious enough to warrant an inquiry.

We will certainly go into the whole lot and then we will take a position on it...We certainly don’t want to brush anything under the carpet. This is a serious issue and we will look into it in detail.

Pachauri gave no details as to the manner or the duration of his proposed investigation. His previous (and quite recent) Draconian prescriptions for the regulation of Western society would cast doubt on the seriousness of any investigation he saw fit to conduct. But that he would even talk about conducting an investigation, after first saying specifically that it was unwarranted, suggests at least that he is fearful of the harm done to the reputation of his panel, who has relied upon data from the East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (CRU) for years.

This is the third such investigation announced so far. Investigations into the conduct of Michael E. Mann, of Hockey Stick fame, and of Phil Jones, former CRU Director, are now pending.

The controversy has caused tempers to flare in the traditionally fractious British Parliament, and also in the United States Senate and House of Representatives and in the Australian Senate. In the United States, more local newspapers are taking note of the scandal and its aftermath as the investigations, and the parliamentary invectives on both sides of the Atlantic (and "Down Under"), multiply.

If any of these three investigative bodies were actually interested in evidence of wrongdoing, then two commentators discovered overnight by Anthony Watts could provide substantial proof, in the form of analysis of data obtained elsewhere than from CRU, and from the program code contained in the CRU Archive documents folder. First, Joanne Nova published a fresh analysis of available data from many, many sources, not limited to CRU-authored studies, that demonstrate beyond doubt that the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) did occur. In fact, except for two studies finding medieval temperatures colder than present (by 0.25 and 1.2 degrees Celsius), most of the world was warmer than present, by margins averaging 0.5 degrees Celsius and varying from 0.15 to 3.0 degrees Celsius. Joanne Nova's blog entry is extensively illustrated with multiple graphs and charts that not only demonstrate MWP, but also demonstrate that the original "Hockey Stick" studies were subject to selection bias that, Ms. Nova says, was deliberate and with intent to defraud.

Robert Greiner of CubeAntics published this analysis of the CRU program code. His conclusion, backed by illustrations of the code and graphs he generated by running it, is that the code was also written with manifest intent to deceive. (Hat tip: WattsUpWithThat)

Finally, Rex Murphy of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation delivered this editorial, embedded here. His comment on the excuse by CRU that it had lost its data: "You wouldn't accept that at a Grade 9 science fair."

UPDATE: Nile Gardiner at the Daily Telegraph (London) says that any UN investigation, and particularly by the IPCC or its current head, holds little promise. He faults the UN itself, saying that it is rife with corruption at all levels, and finds particular fault with Mr. Pachauri, on account of his previous remarks about Western civilization, which are as extreme as any that any of the principals in the Climategate affair have ever made. He insists that the proper inquiries ought to be made by the United States Senate and the British House of Commons.

Like this article? Want to be notified of more? Click Subscribe above.