Leading article: Climate change fightback, part 1

Wednesday 31 March 2010 00:00 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Professor Phil Jones, head of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, has been vilified for allegedly hiding scientific data on "global cooling" and subverting the peer-review process. These allegations emerged from the selective leak of hundreds of emails he had sent from his university computer. The controversy resulting from the publication of these emails on the internet has now led to four different official investigations.

The first of these inquiries, by the House of Commons all-party Science and Technology Committee, has now reported and it states that the reputation of Professor Jones and the three full-time scientists who make up his unit remains intact. He did not hide or manipulate scientific data and he did not subvert the peer-review process, the committee of MPs has concluded.

Where there is criticism, it is a general one, connected with the tendency of climate scientists worldwide to be too possessive of their raw scientific data and computer codes. It was Professor Jones's reluctance to release this information to those he believed wanted to undermine his life's work that led him to drag his feet on Freedom of Information requests.

The University of East Anglia did not help matters in this regard. According to the MPs, the university fostered a culture of non-disclosure, evidently believing this was in the interests of its staff – scientists such as Professor Jones. But this policy backfired spectacularly, once the emails were leaked. They depicted a scientist under intense pressure from dozens of Freedom of Information requests. The wording of some of the emails was also unfortunate – "awful" was the word Professor Jones has used.

This short report is not the end of the matter. Wider investigations by Sir Muir Russell and into the science by Lord Oxburgh are set to report in a few weeks' time. We do not know what conclusions they will reach. But one thing is certain, judging from the select committee's report: the consensus on global warming remains. It is a reality, and human activities are more than likely to be largely responsible. We owe scientists like Professor Jones a debt of gratitude for pointing this out.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in