Roger Pielke Jr.'s Blog: FOIA2011 on The Shameful Paper

The gatekeeping of the IPCC process is abundantly clear, and the shadowy suggestion that they can find out who the reviewers are from another colleague is a bit unsettling as well.

Climategate 2.0: Do new emails undermine global warming science? - Capital Weather Gang - The Washington Post

I could not agree more with Emanuel when he says the the contents of the Climategate emails are not the real scandal, but that it’s instead the effort to discredit climate change science.

...There are surely meaningful topics to debate in climate science. Competent people can disagree about how big of a problem global warming is. But the scientific community has largely moved beyond the scientific issues brought to light in the Climategate 1.0 emails and more emails on the same issues only serve as an unneeded distraction.

- Bishop Hill blog - Newsnight does Climategate II

Billions In Skeptic Money Now Available! | Real Science

These articles never tell how to get the money. I think it is at 1-800-socialists-will-lie-about-anything-to-stay-in-power-and-they-have-no-morals-or-any-sense-of-common-decency

Climategate 2: the CSIRO link | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

I would be very concerned if the material comes out under WWF auspices in a way that can be interpreted as saying that “even a
greenie group like WWF” thinks large areas of the world will have negligible climate change. But that is where your 95% confidence limit
leads.