Article by David Henderson in The Australian
TWO recent episodes have given rise to concerns about the quality and reliability of expert advice on climate change.
First was the unauthorised release of a mass of emails from the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia: the contents have put in question the conduct of CRU scientists and some of their correspondents.
Second is the discovery that statements made in the fourth and most recent assessment report (AR4) from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change were based on sources that should not have been given weight. In relation to what was said about Himalayan glaciers, the IPCC has issued a formal admission of error.
The concerns raised by these episodes are well founded. However, Climategate and Glaciergate are not to be viewed in isolation. They are instances of a more fundamental and deeply entrenched phenomenon.
Read the rest of the article in The Australian.