“It is the warmers who have convinced themselves that their conclusions are irrefutable.”
Lorne Gunter writes in the National Post:
… Frankly, I don’t see the leak of the real Heartland documents as all that devious. In 2009, and again last year, someone released emails and computer files from the Climate Research Unit at Britain’s East Anglia University – documents that seem to show prominent pro-warming scientists conspiring to hide the fact that their research does not show the disastrous warming they have predicted for more than two decades. These documents are real, too, and obtained either by a hacker or a disgruntled insider. Up to that point, the two leaks are on par, ethically.
But what makes the Gleick leaks worse is the fake “confidential memo.” Climategate – the name given to the 2009 and 2011 anti-warming leaks – involves only real documents. The interpretation of their meaning is the subject of debate, but their authenticity is not. The potentially scandalous discussions actually occurred…
One minor point: Warmists believe (or pretend to believe) that they have proof while the scientific fact is they don’t. It’s not just a debate between warmists and skeptics about what the indications might mean. Warmism chooses to ignore the only salient scientific fact that there is no proof – only a selective guess.
One more important point: Warmists have married their opinion-as-fact to social, legal, economic, religious and political policy again claiming that their non-proof is also proof that their non-scientific goals are required. Even if the science were actually proven, what to do about, if anything, is not for them to answer. They are scientifically polluted and the EPA should outlaw them – Ok, Just threw that in there for fun.