Judy Curry's Q&A about the CRU Oxburgh investigation findings and her repeated assertion of IPCC corruption is well worth a read: an inconvenient provocateur
Combine that with Pielke snrs blog posts about fundamental issues and we see that the IPCC consensus is unraveled not just in the eyes of ranting sceptics but from within, from peer reviewed published climate scientists
Where does that leave us? Back to where science is treated as a contested method or methods of investigation and not as a source of authoritative pronouncement.
Week in review – science and policy edition - by Judith Curry A few things that caught my eye this past week. Analysis of 1930s ‘Dust Bowl’ drought finds heat waves were preconditioned by unusually dry...
2 hours ago