Report Says ClimateGate Scammers are 'Unhelpful' But Honest

This fits hand in glove with the item about the Dutch agency that said their report was rife with errors but still clings to the global warming hoax. Today we're treated to this gem from a so-called independent review of the ClimateGate scammers at East Anglia University.

Scientists involved in the 'Climategate' email affair were 'unhelpful' and not sufficiently open about their studies, an independent review said today.

But the review, led by Sir Muir Russell, found that the 'rigour and honesty' of the scientists at the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit (CRU) is not in doubt.

Um, if they weren't open about their studies how on Earth can it be concluded they're honest about anything?

The review was initiated after hundreds of emails sent by researchers at CRU were leaked on the internet in November last year.

First revealed by the Daily Mail, the files showed scientists plotting how to avoid Freedom of Information requests and appeared to show them discussing how to manipulate data.

Some of the most controversial contained personal attacks on climate change sceptics and one mentioned using a 'trick' to massage years of temperature data 'to hide the decline'.

Today's review found that the graph referred to in this now infamous email from the centre's head, Professor Phil Jones, was 'misleading' because it did not make plain what the scientists had done.

The graph which showed global temperature rises, and which was used in a report published in 1999 by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), did not show temperature data from tree-rings once they diverged from actual measurements in the 1960s, falling while real temperatures rose.

The review said it was not misleading to omit part of the tree ring temperature series but the process should have been made plain in the graph, caption or text.

The findings come after a Dutch review into the IPCC's key 2007 report was criticised over a lack of transparency and for playing down the positive effects of global warming.

But it concluded said the errors did not undermine the findings that the negative impacts of climate change posed 'substantial risks' to most parts of the world.

So all you evil deniers just shut up and go away now, OK?

Update: Looks like the head scammer is getting his job back.

Professor Phil Jones, the scientist at the centre of the 'climategate scandal', is to be reinstated in his role at the University of East Anglia after being cleared of dishonesty by a major review.

Prof Jones lost his job as head of the Climatic Research Unit at the UEA after personal emails he sent appeared on the internet.

The emails referred to a 'trick' used to interpret data and the death of a leading climate change sceptic as "cheering news."

Sceptics claimed the stolen emails showed Prof Jones and his colleagues were willing to manipulate key data to exaggerate the rise in global temperatures.

The scandal, that became known as 'climategate', caused repercussions around the world as it was used by those who question the case for man made global warming.

However a comprehensive review into the case by Sir Muir Russell, a senior UK civil servant, has cleared Prof Jones of dishonest behaviour.

Edward Acton, Vice Chancellor of the UEA, immediately announced that Prof Jones will be reinstated as Director of Research in CRU, a role of similar importance to his last post.

He said it was a personal vindication for Prof Jones, who has said he considered suicide over the affair.

"We hope this means the wilder assertions about the climate science community will stop," he said.

However sceptics claimed the report was a whitewash and questioned the reinstatement of Prof Jones.

David Holland, one of the leading sceptics on the blogosphere, pointed out that Prof Jones referred to deleting emails in one of his communications.

"Would you trust a man who has asked to delete evidence?" he said.