The political whitewash of the Climatic Research Unit and IPCC was stunning and brazen

Climate Science and the IPCC Fail Legal Cross Examination

By Dr. Tim Ball
Wednesday, June 9, 2010

The political whitewash of the work of Michael Mann, Phil Jones and all those associated with the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was stunning and brazen. They did not listen to anyone who knew what the accused had done. They examined only a few papers carefully selected by the Royal Society, which itself had a history of political involvement and propaganda.

So they only spoke with the defendants, only considered a controlled fraction of the evidence, and the judges were carefully selected for their prejudice. It bypassed every basic element of jurisprudence. When those basics are applied in legal examination of the climate data and record the ‘official’ science of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is proved wanting.

Political Bias In British Schools: Gore’s Movie Dissected

The first newsworthy case was in a British court when a father, Stuart Dimmock, brought a lawsuit against the then Secretary of State for Education and Skills. His lawsuit claimed there was political bias, political indoctrination, and lack of balance in the presentation of global warming. Central to the problem was Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth. It was used as if it presented facts accurately and without political or scientific bias. The Judge ruled that, “It is now common ground that it is not simply a science film - although it is clear that it is based substantially on scientific research and opinion – but that it is a political film, albeit of course not party political.â€