Polar Bear Science and the Spin Cycle - NYTimes.com

The most succinct reply came from Melissa Schwartz, the deputy chief of staff and communications director for the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management:

The agency placed Mr. Monnett on administrative leave for reasons having nothing to do with scientific integrity, his 2006 journal article, or issues related to permitting, as has been alleged. Any suggestions or speculation to the contrary are wrong.

Her statement doesn’t mesh well with the transcript [ya think?] of one of the investigative interviews conducted with Monnett in February — which goes through page after page of questioning on swimming and dead polar bears and statistics.

But it is so definitive that it clearly indicates to me that any interpretations of what’s going on here are premature.

Science? What science? « The Daily Bayonet

For most climate alarmists, it’s not about science and never has been. If it was about science, Weepy Bill McKibben would be laughed into oblivion for insisting that 350ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere is a ‘safe’ level, Joe Romm would be recognized as an emotional train wreck in the pay of a far-left organization and Michael Mann would probably be an unemployed lab tech with a grudge.

Yet to warmists, these guys are rock stars because they’re willing to spout nonsense that makes the incurious and the follower-set feel good about themselves. If it was about science, the debate might actually be over, but climate science is dodgy at best. No matter how many tears Weepy Bill sheds or how spittle-flecked the Rommper room becomes, as more and more evidence is collected, mankind looks less and less culpable for global warming. When there is any, that is.