UEA CRU FOUND INNOCENT AGAIN
But hang on. Let's ask some questions about this investigation.
Q: who created and financed it?
A: the UEA themselves
Q: you mean the UEA investigated itself?
Q: who chaired the investigation?
A: Lord Oxburgh
Q: Who is he?
A: Vice-Chair GLOBE UK and Vice-President GLOBE International, Chairman of Shell from 2004-2005, chairman of the Carbon Capture and Storage Association and of the wind energy company Falck Renewables (so he is totally 100% bona fide impartial...NOT!)
Q: What is GLOBE?
A: GLOBE is a global green movement/forum for world leaders to ram through the Nazi green agenda based on bogus science and is intimately linked to The Club of
Q: were there any criticisms of the CRU in this brilliant whitewash?
A: yes. they are not as keen at rigourous statistical analysis as most scientists (yet global policy affecting six billion people is being rapidly implemented due to their statistical analysis).
Q: So isn't this all a green Nazi scam run by the rich for the rich to implement silent genocide and lucrative carbon trading systems for the Bilderberg banks that buggered us last decade?
A: In the words of the nodding dog in the Churchill Insurance ads, Oh yes!
Scientists cleared of malpractice in UEA's hacked emails inquiry
Researchers 'dedicated if slightly disorganised', but basic science was fair, finds inquiry commissioned by university
The scientists at the centre of the row over the hacked climate emails have been cleared of any deliberate malpractice by the second of three inquiries into their conduct.
The inquiry panel, led by the former chair of the House of Lords science and technology select committee Lord Oxburgh, was commissioned by the University of East Anglia with investigating the research produced by the scientists at its Climatic Research Unit (CRU).
The work of the unit has come under intense scrutiny since November when thousands of private emails between the researchers were released onto the internet. At a press conference earlier today Lord Oxburgh said, "Whatever was said in the emails, the basic science seems to have been done fairly and properly," although his panel did criticise the scientists for not using the best statistical techniques at times.