No, Prime Minister. That drought wasn’t man-made, either | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

And guess which scandal-ridden and alarmist IPCC report relied on Karoly’s claims?

Vox Popoli interviews James Delingpole

[Q] I think it's natural to be skeptical of global warming when you hail from Minnesota, which was once covered by ice. And of course, around this time of year, global warming sounds pretty good.

[A] There is a very interesting report that was sent to me recently written by one of the numerous lobbying foundations that advises the propagandists of how best to advance the cause of global warming in the minds of the various people around the world. And it said precisely this: In warmer countries it clearly makes sense to talk in terms of global warming. But in other places, where the weather was unlikely to behave in the correct manner, they should call it climate change and be sure to claim that any form of extreme weather event, be it cold or hot, was definitely further proof of this "climate change." The dishonesty of what is being foisted upon us is extraordinary.

[Q] Why did it take so long for the global-warming proponents to realize that Climategate was a serious blow to their efforts?

[A] Denial. Denial is the obvious answer. Even now, you're getting a lot of warmists, particularly the environment correspondents in the mainstream newspapers and at the BBC, they're kind of finessing their position. They're preparing their lines of defense. A lot of them are saying things about the recent IPCC revelations like "this of course is much more important than the totally insignificant Climategate e-mails." This is a) an attempt to justify how they were sniffy and didn't report the Climategate e-mails when they happened, and, b) a demonstration of how they want to give their opponents as little ammunition as they can. They want to credit their opponents with as little intelligence or journalistic skill as possible. For me, the significance about the Climategate e-mails was not due to any new and specific revelations, but that for the first time, we had e-mails confirming what a handful of journalists and dissenting scientists had been saying for over a decade – that the global-warming scientists had been cooking the books and fiddling the data, that they had been suppressing the research of scientists who disagreed with them. All of these things that people had suspected before but never been able to prove were suddenly there. The Climategate e-mails were the smoking gun.

The World Today - Calls for IPCC reform after more mistakes 08/02/2010

BOB CARTER: Ever since 1995 there has been a string of scandals involving the IPCC. They are all of the same sort but the science they are doing is not high class or they are trying to manipulate the refereeing procedure or in some cases, they alter reports after the scientists have signed off on them.

So the perplexing thing about this from the point of view of an independent scientist like me is why the press has suddenly picked this up as a big story because it is a very old story.

Panel on Climate Faces Challenges - WSJ.com

The Nobel-prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change faces new challenges following a call for an investigation of its conduct and for its chairman to resign amid continuing criticism of the scientific basis of its reports.

Lawrence Solomon: IPCC faces another desertion – its own past chair! - FP Comment

Watson’s new-found scepticism of the science being produced by the IPCC represents an ironic reversal. In 2002, he remarked that "The only person who doesn't believe the science is President Bush."