Slice your average environment correspondent through the middle and you're going to find a left-leaning liberal arts graduate who is utterly out of his/her depth. Their world view is being swept from underneath them and they are being shown - in ways that they do not really and have never had to understand - that the guys they thought were the goodies are in fact "at it" and that those they have spent a decade disparaging as deniers were in fact spot on.
"Most climate models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) show that the Earth will respond in an El Nino-like way to global warming.
"But a few of the models do recreate this dynamic "La Nina effect", and suggest that that when you heat the Earth's surface, the climate system tries to offset and cool.
First-up: models do not "show" anything. The models try to predict things. Only measurements and observations can show things.
Then we get this weird idea that most models predict X but some predict the opposite of X. Does this not suggest that many of the models are ... wrong ?
@GrumpyMike - how does this fit with chemical engineering ? Did you ever get models contradicting each other ?
Roger Harrabin defends the man at the heart of the ClimateGate affair, Prof. Phil Jones:
In an interview with the Press Association, Professor Jones said he wouldn't resign. He said the suggestion that there was a conspiracy to alter evidence was "complete rubbish". And he insisted the CRU had never manipulated or deleted data or e-mails.
Sorry, Roger. Several of the leaked emails From Jones mention deleting emails and they encourage others to delete their emails as well.
Just wondering how this will play out. By his own admission there has been severe academic misconduct at UEA.