A series of investigations have cleared the climate scientists at the centre of the “climate gate” scandal of falsifying or suppressing data.
In November, a series of leaked emails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia purporting to show them falsifying data to promote the concept of human-caused global warming were released to the media.
This occurred in the lead up to the United Nations December climate summit in Copenhagen.
The emails were leapt on by climate change deniers seeking to cast doubt on the validity of the science showing that climate change is real, human activity is causing it and drastic action is needed urgently to tackle the problem.
A media storm was unleashed that became known as “climategate”.
However, a series of investigations have cleared the scientists involved.
An independent British inquiry “confirmed that the e-mails stolen from its Climatic Research Unit revealed no evidence that the case for human-affected global warming is false”, DailyTech.com said on July 8.
A previous inquiry in April “concluded that there was no malpractice, and on Wednesday, after the third investigation was led by former civil servant Muir Russell, it was decided that the e-mails contained no proof that would ruin the case for manmade global warming”.
Pennsylvania State University professor Dr Michael Mann, whose correspondence with CRU chief Dr Phil Jones was at the centre of the storm, was completely exonerated by a PSU investigation, Grist.org said on July 1. Mann was subjected to reviews by the university and cleared in both.
Grist.org said the first review found “no substance” to the following allegations: that Mann engaged or took part in, directly or indirectly, any actions with the intent to suppress or falsify data, or any actions with the intent to delete, conceal or otherwise destroy emails, information and/or data.
The second review, conducted by an “investigatory committee of faculty members with impeccable credentials” found there was “no substance” to the allegation that Mann engaged or took part in, directly or indirectly, “any actions that seriously deviated from accepted practices within the academic community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research or other scholarly activities”.
The decision was unanimous.
Grist.org pointed out Mann deserved an apology from a range of media outlets for slanderous allegations against him, including from the Wall Street Journal, Newsweek and CBS.