- The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation - http://blog.heritage.org -
Climate Science Exposed: New Report on the CRU Controversy
Posted By Nicolas Loris On February 24, 2010 @ 7:00 pm In Energy | Comments Disabled
“The science behind climate change is settled, and human activity is responsible for global warming. That conclusion is not a partisan one.” – Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson. 
Forget being partisan or not. That conclusion of settled science isn’t existent. It hasn’t been for a long time, but they are especially bold words in light of the climate scandal involving the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and the flaws uncovered in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. Yesterday, the Senate Minority Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW) released a new report that scrutinizes the climate scandal  and CRU and its connection with the IPCC and U.S. government policy.
The report delves into the email trail, the IPCC consensus of “unequivocal warming”, the legal and policy issues of Climategate and the EPA’s reliance on the IPCC to make regulatory decisions in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The EPA’s endangerment finding, which took effect January 14, gives the EPA authority under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) to regulate greenhouse gases (GHGs). Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, said:
“So this administration has said, “All right. We couldn’t go it legislatively so we’re going to do it on our own. We’re going to do the damage, inflict the economic damage to this country that would have come under cap and trade the same as if we had been able to pass it.” Now, I think that’s interesting. I would like to say this one thing. The chairman made the statement that the Supreme Court’s mandating this stuff. They’re not mandating a thing. The Supreme Court said you have three choices. You can either, well, either find an endangerment finding or do not find it, or you can say that the science is uncertain.
And I think what we’re going to be asking you to do, during the question and answer time is to find that it’s not certain. You can have an endangerment finding. That can change because you didn’t know at the time that you were basing this on the IPCC flawed science, that the science was flawed. You didn’t believe that, but nonetheless that’s where we are today. We’re going to be making the request, Madam Chairman, that we go back, relook at this and also that — that — and the EPA have their I.G. (Inspector General)looking into this just the same as all the other nations are doing at this time all throughout Europe.”
You can find the full report here . What’s most interesting is that it’s the politicians arguing that the science is settled while the climatologists suggest otherwise. Even Phil Jones, former director of the East Anglia’s CRU admitted , “I don’t believe the vast majority of climate scientists think this. This is not my view. There is still much that needs to be undertaken to reduce uncertainties, not just for the future, but for the instrumental (and especially the palaeoclimatic) past as well.”
The EPA needs to reevaluate the science before it moves forward on a long road of expensive and expansive  environmental regulations.
Article printed from The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation: http://blog.heritage.org
URL to article: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/02/24/climate-science-exposed-new-report-on-the-cru-controversy/
URLs in this post:
 Image: http://www.foundry.org/wp-content/uploads/earth-100223.jpg
 Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson.: http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/02/23/23greenwire-epa-chief-goes-toe-to-toe-with-senate-gop-over-72892.html
 released a new report that scrutinizes the climate scandal: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=fb6d4083-802a-23ad-46e8-c5c098e22aa1&Region_id=&Issue_id=
 admitted: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm
 on a long road of expensive and expansive: http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/wm2768.cfm
Copyright © 2011 The Heritage Foundation. All rights reserved.