A little truth would be nice
Posted by Jeff Id on June 4, 2010
Ok, Climate Audit has a post on a reply from Ronald Oxburgh (of the Oxburg coverup of climategate) to a request from Steve McIntyre for documentation of papers and procedures in the investigation. Steve did a fine job venting on it – it turns out that Canadians do get wound up on occasion, but the quote which sent me up a wall was in response to this request by SteveM.
Is there a document setting out the terms of reference of the inquiry? If so, could you please provide me with a copy of this document? Did the terms of reference specifically precluded from considering one of the most important CRU activities – Lead Authorship in IPCC reports – or was this omission your own decision?
The Report states that the eleven papers were “selected on the advice of the Royal Society” and that “CRU agreed that they were a fair sample of the work of the Unit.” Can you provide me with copies of the documents evidencing the Royal Society providing this advice and the CRU agreeing that they were a “fair sample”. Did you carry out any due diligence of your own to verify that the articles were in fact a “fair sample”?
Which was followed by this reply:
I am afraid that I am not able to be very helpful as none of the documents about which you inquire exists.
Which I am stunned to say is exactly the issue which led to the FOI’s in the first place. The reveiw was such a joke that not even a list of ‘sample’ papers was provided. Just what the hell do they expect for a reaction when their own review is so closed to the public and so baseless THAT THE MOST BASIC DOCUMENTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO THE CHAIRMAN!!
Is it irony or bovine scatology.