Ken Berwitz

This excerpt of a truly remarkable commentary by Rajendra Pachauri is from an article published in London's Guardian:

Leaked emails won't harm UN climate body, says chairman

Rajendra Pachauri says there is 'virtually no possibility' of a few scientists biasing IPCC's advice, after UAE hacking breach

James Randerson

guardian.co.uk, Sunday 29 November 2009 17.03 GMT

There is "virtually no possibility" of a few scientists biasing the advice given to governments by the UN's top global warming body, its chair said today.

Rajendra Pachauri defended the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the wake of apparent suggestions in emails between climate scientists at the University of East Anglia that they had prevented work they did not agree with from being included in the panel's fourth assessment report, which was published in 2007.

The emails were made public this month after a hacker illegally obtained them from servers at the university.

Pachauri said the large number of contributors and rigorous peer review mechanism adopted by the IPCC meant that any bias would be rapidly uncovered.

"The processes in the IPCC are so robust, so inclusive, that even if an author or two has a particular bias it is completely unlikely that bias will find its way into the IPCC report," he said.

Yeah, ok.  Right.  Great argument, Rajendra

The processes are "so robust, so inclusive", that these so-called scientists have been lying to our faces for years, and covering their tracks by dumping the raw data which someone with even the slightest interest in facts and truth might use to debunk their claims. 

And it all happened right under your nose, Rajendra. 

One of two things is true:  you either didn't know about it, or, much worse, you did  know about it and hushed it up just like they did.  Which of these two possibilities makes anything you say about the global warming scam worth a damn?

One of the best comments about this article was made by a reader from the US:

In the United States we have this little thing called reasonable doubt. It should be clear to any sane person with a little common sense that perhaps the climate change hysteria needs to be examined truthfully and NOT by those who have the most to gain by convincing the world that we're facing armageddon. It's merely a scare tactic aimed at generating billions of dollars in taxes for governments worldwide. In turn, institutions whose "scientists" came up with this "global warming" scam to begin with are rewarded with fat annual grants. It's about money!! Get that through your heads, people of the world! It's ONLY about money!

Does he/she have a point?  You better believe it.

One other thing:  readers may have noticed that the newspapers I am quoting from in this and the previous global-warming-scam post are from London.  That is because while this is major, lead-story material there, it is largely being buried in the United States by our wonderful "neutral" media.

Then they wonder why people call them biased.