A formal inquiry by the British Parliament’s Science and Technology Committee into the Climategate email scandal has largely absolved the British scientists involved of the most serious allegations against them. The panel did however also conclude that there were issues that needed to be addressed in order to allay public doubts about the scientists’ work.

• View the complete Parliament here

The panel took a cursory look into the accusations that have been leveled against the University Of East Anglia (UAE), its Climate Research Unit (CRU) and the head of CRU, Dr. Phil Jones. Only one day of hearings were held in the inquiry that was first announced in January. 

Among the issues the committee discussed were the charges of manipulation / suppression of data, UAE’s / CRU’s practices for information dissemination and its compliance with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

In a 63 page report (link above), the British MP’s outline the case against those involved and the conclusions they reached. For most critical issues including the charges of data manipulation that were brought about by emails discussing a ‘trick’ to ‘hide the decline’, the panel concluded Jones and his colleagues had not done anything untoward.

It further concluded that the climate data generated by CRU is in line with other datasets from NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) and the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). “We therefore conclude that there is independent verification, through the use of other methodologies and other sources of data, of the results and conclusions of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia,” the report said.

A statement accompanying the report, the panel said that, “The focus on Professor Jones and CRU has been largely misplaced.” It notes that Jones’ limiting of access to the underlying data of his conclusions about manmade climate change were ‘standard practice’ in climate science.

However, all was not perfect in the report at the panel slammed the scientists and university for their lack of action on Freedom of Information Act requests.  Get all the details at the Climate Change Examiner.

Dr. Phil Jones has gone from relative obscurity to worldwide prominence as the central figure in the Climategate email scandal. His actions and those of other climate scientists as revealed by the messages have cast a pall over the state of climate science and the manmade climate change theory. In interviews conducted in recent days, Jones shockingly reveals his own doubts about the science.

The world has been told the ‘science is settled’ and the ‘consensus’ of the scientific community is solid – man is the primary driver of climate change on the earth. Skeptics that have pointed out problems with the data and climate computer models. They have said that the lack of warming in the past 10 years despite increases in carbon dioxide show the science is not as solid as it has been portrayed.

Until this past year those that had their doubts were largely ignored. The email scandal and recent revelations of significant problems with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) reports have given rise to new doubts.

In interviews with the BBC and “Nature” over the past week, Jones gives credence to many of the arguments of skeptics and acknowledges the science may not be as solid as the world has been led to believe.

The BBC asked Jones about how the rate of warming from 1975 to 1998 was identical to warming recorded previously from 1860 to 1880 and 1910 to 1940.

Jones acknowledged that the warming in earlier periods was at nearly identical rates as later periods. “The warming rates are not statistically significantly different,” he said. The fact similar rates of warming were recorded before significant CO2 emissions casts a doubt on the argument that CO2 is driving the warming.

Jones admitted that there had been ‘no statistically significant’ warming over the last 15 years. He however maintains that is simply an interruption of warming that will continue.

That wasn’t all Jones said.  He continued Medieval Warm Period and questions about the accuracy of climate data.  Be sure to visit the Climate Change Examiner for the complete story.