“ALL OUR MODELS ARE WRONG:” ClimateGate 2.0: A Fresh Trove Of Embarrassing Emails. “There was always an element of tragedy in the first ‘Climategate’ emails, as scientists were under pressure to tell a story that the physical evidence couldn’t support – and that the scientists were reluctant to acknowledge in public. The new email archive, already dubbed ‘Climategate 2.0’, is much larger than the first, and provides an abundance of context for those earlier changes. . . . To their credit, some of the climate scientists realised the dangers of the selective approach politicians demanded, which meant cherry-picking evidence to make it suitably dramatic, and quietly hiding caveats.” Others, however, not so much.
Plus this: “So the mewling infant that we call Climate Science – a 40-year-young offshoot of meteorology – has been thrust into a political role long before it’s capable of supporting the claims made on its behalf. From the archives we can see the scientists know that too, and we can read their own reluctance to make those claims, too. ‘What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation?’ muses one scientist. ‘They’ll kill us probably.’”