This is a "smear campaign to distract the public," said Mann. "Those opposed to climate action, simply don't have the science on their side," he added.I had wondered what tack the climate "scientists" were going to take once it was revealed what a credibility problem they faced. The stolen emails reveal a coordinated campaign to fudge and hide data, to exclude alternate opinions, and to ostracize journals that will not toe the accepted line. They reveal the fact prior scary-but-incorrect prognostications rely on calculations that cannot be re-created. In short, the "consensus" is fraudulent and the facts upon which that consensus agrees are vapor. That does not make it a science problem in their minds*, but a public relations nightmare. If the people do not believe scientists, they might believe anything.
Professor Davies called the stolen data "the latest example of a sustained and, in some instances, a vexatious campaign" designed "to distract from reasoned debate" about urgent action governments must take to reverse climate change.
So the first defense is the victim card: we are the victims of a smear campaign. With the expected sympathy not arising however, those who would crush all opposing opinion cleverly attempt to propose "reasoned debate," but not on the conclusions: the only debate allowed is the government response to the settled fact of global warming.
So don't go arguing over whether the patient has diarrhea, pyorrhea, or gonorrhea, we've got a head to amputate here: yours.
UPDATE: Awww yeah:
SYDNEY – 's plans for an emissions trading system to combat were scuttled Wednesday in Parliament, handing a defeat to a government that had hoped to set an example at talks next week.Who says we never have any good news here?
* After all, they are familiar with the so-called science behind it, no one better.