Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past

[Wildcat]

Did I not mentioned earlier that newscientist is strongly pro AGW? So why would you consider their report more balanced?

 

 

Because their report sticks to the relevant facts rather than mixing in a report from Nigel Lawson's nutty lobby group, and repeating accusations not the findings. Quite simply because the journalism is of a higher standard and more impartial.

[retep]

Because their report sticks to the relevant facts rather than mixing in a report from Nigel Lawson's nutty lobby group, and repeating accusations not the findings. Quite simply because the journalism is of a higher standard and more impartial.

 

Telegraph report,

“The Committee is concerned that the Sir Muir Russell inquiry did not fully investigate the serious allegation relating to the deletion of emails and finds it unsatisfactory that it has been left with a verbal reassurance from the Vice Chancellor of UEA that the emails still exist,” he said.

+what wiki doesn't want to hear

 

Newscientist report,

The MPs felt the main inquiry into the affair, headed by former civil servant Muir Russell, failed to investigate this "serious allegation" properly. It was, they said, "unsatisfactory that we are left with a verbal reassurance from the vice-chancellor that the emails still exist", but no proof.

+plus what he does

[Wildcat]

Thank you for pointing out that the New Scientist report covers the essential details impartially. You will of course note the criticism is directed at the review and not the scientists and that the issue at stake is rather trivial