Bate Strikes Back!

Roger Bate responds to my article in The Mark:

Since your vitriolic attack not only hurts me but ludicrously tries to hurt others for reasons I am unaware of, it is my duty to respond. Amir Attaran is one of the most gifted and principled researchers I've ever met, which is why I wanted to help him stay at Harvard. As the then Director of Africa Fighting Malaria I allocated funds to Harvard for his work there, with no strings attached. AFM has never taken any funding from the tobacco or pharma industries and as such the funding for Attaran, which came from a private European foundation, was not either. I have responded to the allegations about me here. Any decent researcher would have found this article, making me wonder why no mention of my response was used in your article. The few proper journalists who’ve written about this topic have at least had the courtesy of contacting me directly for a response, but not you. I was probably foolish to briefly consult for Philip Morris in 1998, and definitely foolish for writing the letter you quote in the fall of that year – because of how it’s being used today. PM never responded to my letter and I never corresponded with the company again. I did not know at the time but the tobacco industry has largely been on the wrong side (your side) of the DDT issue (and would never have funded my proposal anyway). See [here] for AFM’s response to BAT’s opposition to DDT. DDT continues to save lives in the myriad countries it’s used, I have done nothing to be ashamed of, and I rest easy at night knowing I’ve fought on the right side of this issue!

Roger Bate,
fellow American Enterprise Institute,
rbate@aei.org

And here again is that letter he mentions; and here's an even nicer one.

NDP Perfidy On 10%ers?

While it appears as though the PC may be ready to throw in the towel on this one, Jack's Dipper's are looking a bit snaky:

In fact, the NDP, which voted for the Liberal motion, may be the party that gets the Conservatives off the hook on the bulk-mailing issue.

NDP Leader Jack Layton launched a blistering tirade against "King Stephen Harper" only to waffle when it came down to whether his party would actually support the ten-percenter ban behind the closed doors of the Board of Internal Economy meetings.

Is a behind-the-scenes deal in the works? A coalition, as it were?

Anyway, here's the Membership List for the BIC.

Libby Davies seems to be the one to watch. Does the Chair get to vote, I wonder?

PS. I note that the PMO has issued Tory MP Bruce Stanton an official "mind change" since he voted no in the HOC. Some interesting maneuvers going on.

Newspaper Readership Stabilizes

Conservative newspaper readership remains in flaming death spiral:

Weekday readership for The Globe and Mail rose 6.2 per cent to 406,500 in the GTA, the NADbank survey found. In comparison, the Toronto Sun's weekday readership plunged 21.5 per cent to 372,300 while the National Post fell 13.5 per cent to 167,800.

More statistics here. And a lament to the TO Sun of yore here. Gawd I love it when old newspapermen cry!

Tories Tough On Teens Agenda Hits Snag

Overhauling the Youth Criminal Justice Act had been a cornerstone of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's re-election platform, and yesterday his government tabled a bill that follows through on that promise, putting a greater emphasis on protecting the public rather than rehabilitating young offenders.

In effect, teenagers as young as 14 convicted of violent offences could be sentenced as adults and their identities no longer shielded.

Conservative Senator Jacque Demers, January 28, 2010

"I will not send a boy of 14 or 16 years to be assaulted in prison."

Attaran Update

The Mark has picked up my story, which I am most proud of, on the connections among Iggy, Amir Attaran, a fierce critic of the government's Afghan policy, tobacco scientist Roger Bate, and the tobacco industry front group Africa Fighting Malaria.

A few things have happened since that piece written. For one thing, Attaran has denied receiving tobacco industry funding at the Carr Center (although not, clearly, from AFM). For another thing, I have been in touch with Adam Sarvana, whose work I quoted from extensively in the previous post, and he has expressed the opinion that Attaran is "principled" but was unfortunately taken in by Roger Bate's and the AFM's "Rachel Carson/Environmentalists have murdered millions of third-worlders" line.

So the working assumption must be that Attaran is unaware of the AFM, and Bate's, dubious pedigree. Nevertheless, the AFM is what it is: an tobacco industry front group. And it is certainly interesting that this letter from Attaran on the dangers of phasing out DDT use too quickly should wind up in the files of British American Tobacco.

Finally, this is the full-text of Roger Bate's letter to Philip Morris in which he outlines the aims and purpose of his anti-malaria "operation", which eventually became the AFM.

An Effective Bit Of Oppositionizing

OTTAWA–MPs have voted to put a stop to the practice of mailing taxpayer-funded political flyers to voters outside their own ridings.

A minor issue, but a major irritant in the body politic. We'll see if the Tories ignore this motion. They've been employing 10%ers as a form of guerrilla marketing, as the more outrageous ones tend to get loudly denounced and their message winds up as part of the daily news cycle. But now they will not only be asking like assholes, they'll be ignoring the will of Parliament in order to send out the kind of literature that really annoys people. Let's see if this vote tilts the cost/benefit analysis against the miserable instruments.

Kudos to the Libs: a real, though small, victory.

How Helena Got Her MBA

So yesterday morning BCer reveals that Helena Guergis has recently completed her MBA from the University of Alberta. Harris MacLeod over at the Hill-Times reads Jeff, reads Helena's wiki page, and thinks "WTF! How'd she get an MBA with only a real estate certificate from Georgia College. Does she really have an MBA? Does she have something better in the way of an undergrad degree?" Suddenly, Ottawa is abuzz!

About a 1/2 hour later the buzz starts to fade as Elizabeth Thompson phones up UofA and discovers that, yeah, the MBA has indeed been awarded. That leaves Helena's undergraduate degree in question. But then Ted Betts points out over in Jeff's comments that the University will make room for students without an undergraduate degree under certain circumstances, namely where the candidates

...have considerable professional experience.... Individuals who feel that this situation applies to them are encouraged to contact the admissions office to discuss their status."

Presumably the university would have considered her time as the proprietor of a bed and bath shop. Any idiot can be a cabinet minister in the Harper government, so that doesn't count.

And there you have it: LEAVE...HELENA...ALONE!!! at least on
this issue.

Meanwhile here's the only picture of her that I could find on-line that shows even a bit of cleavage.

The Education Of Helena Guergis

Will Jeff Jedras bring down a Cabinet Minister?

If so, I'm going to be very jealous. I've been trying to do that for ages.

Helena Guergis: Part-Time Minister

Between the shoe-throwing, screaming at Plebes, and UN lecturing, Helena Guergis has had time to complete her MBA. All this governing stuff must be easy.

Hudak's Got Separatist Problems

Bill Murdoch takes the old Randy Hillier line, advocating partition:

OWEN SOUND, ONT.–A Progressive Conservative member of the Legislature says he thinks Toronto should become its own province.

He said rural Ontario is fighting a losing battle against "a Toronto mentality," adding that Toronto decision-makers ignore rural voices.

His big complaint--well, the coyote problem looms large, as does "red tape" for food producers.

Of course, unless the producers start selling to one another, it isn't immediately clear how separating from T.O. would solve the problem (or more specifically, separating Toronto off from the rest of Ontario--Rurontario would get the 905 ring). It isn't likely anyone here would want to lower their food safety standards to make it easier for a bunch of beef farmers to sell us downer cows, just because said farmers elect a different government. But if you look at this article on the same meeting of the Bruce County Federation of Agriculture, Murdoch's strategy seems to be clear: partition would allow Rurontario to blackmail Torontario:

Murdoch says Toronto would still rely on the rest of the province for many of its essentials, such as food, energy and raw materials.

"Where are they going to get their power? We've got a nuclear plant. We don't need Toronto," said Murdoch, who is annoyed that new wind energy proposals are in rural Ontario.

But I'm not sure that anyone in London, for example--which would apparently be the capital of the breakaway province--would want to eat rancid steak either, just because their fellow Rurontarions are looking to cut costs.

In any event, I am sooo hoping that Ontario PC leader Tim Hudak looks kindly on Mr. Murdoch's ideas. In fact, I hope he's willing to campaign on them.

Levant Vs. Vigna

The defamation case against Ezra, delayed back in Feb., starts up again today. The Ez seems to have been busy preparing.

John Quiggan Lays The Blame

An Aussie economist lambastes Steve Mc:

In writing my previous post on the “Climategate” break-in to the University of East Anglia computer system , I remained unclear about who was actually responsible for the break-in theft of the emails, which were then selectively quoted to promote a bogus allegation of scientific fraud.

Looking over the evidence that is now available, I think there is enough to point to Steven McIntyre as the person, along with the actual hacker or leaker, who bears primary moral responsibility for the crime.

[...]

25 July 2009: The next day McIntyre announced that he had got a mass of CRU data, essentially all that sought in the harassment campaign, from “a mole”. Note that this may be true or may be misdirection to protect external hackers. In any case, it is clear that his harassment campaign was going hand in hand with attempts to gain unauthorised access to CRU computers, and did not stop when its supposed goal was realised.

Over the next few months, CRU started preparing a response to McIntyre which resulted in the creation of a file called FOIA.zip. Over the weekend beginning Friday 13 November, someone located and copied this file from a back-up server at the university’s Climatic Research Unit, and distributed it widely among anti-science blog sites, including McIntyre’s. It’s unclear whether the extraction of the file required sophisticated hacking, simple illegal entry to a poorly protected site, or McIntyre’s “mole”. What is clear, as this report notes is that going after FOIA.zip indicates that someone in McIntyre’s circle of supporters was responsible.

[...]

Having received the stolen emails, McIntyre played a prominent role in disseminating dishonest and misleading claims about their contents, focusing on the phrases “trick” and “hide the decline” which were used to suggest a conspiracy to commit scientific fraud. In fact, as the U Penn investigation found, these claims were baseless. “Trick” referred to a clever way of combining data, and the “decline” was not a decline in global temperatures but a well-known problematic feature of tree ring data.

Just to repeat: sure as shootin', if and when the police find the CRU hackers, it will be one or more of the bloggers hanging around Climate Audit.

Science In Texas

Stories here and here. Mind you, our gang knows a little bit about knowledge suppression as well, and they know how to do it without raising much of a fuss.

h/t

Lisa Raitt Flees Twitter!!!

Protects tweets from public!

Just speculating, but does this have anything to do with her getting caught tweeting about enjoying the gay coffee at Satanbucks just days after John Baird reaffirmed Tim's as der coffee of der volk? Maybe. The Tories have been on high-Diva alert ever since the Jaffir/Guergis thing imploded.

Ezra Gets All Oiled Up

Ethical Oil: The Case for Not Buying Oil From OPEC Nations, by Ezra Levant (McClelland & Stewart). In his new outing, the Shakedown rabble-rouser is back with more impertinent questions. Sample: We have the Alberta Oil Sands, so is it ethical for us to be importing oil from Sudan, Russia and Mexico.

In his new book, the Ez will do for the tar-sands what he did for racists in Shakedown--ie. make 'em feel wanted in Alberta.

The Niqāb Lady

Go read Dawg. It's what I would have written if I didn't have a cold, minus the dirty jokes.

Also, been out looking at Netbooks. I'll be buying one in the next couple of days. Anyone have a recommendation (keep it under $400 though)?

Also also, any advice on getting Office on one of the things without paying? My current plan is to copy my old 2003 version onto a chip and then onto the Netbook.

I Give You "Sabertooth"

An update to Shaidle's adventures in the holy land: the gal next to Shaidle on the El Al flight to Israel, (a picture now gone even from the google cache), and referred to as "Sabertooth", was Sara Saber-Freedman, the CIC's Montreal EVP. And, as I say, I have been told that the CIC was NOT an official sponsor of Five Foot's tour. And yet Shaidle's hubby made a special effort to have that picture (of a CIC staffer!) disappeared. Go figure.

Note: this guy says the trip was planned "semi-secretly".

An Interesting Tidbit Re Uppal Motion

The CIC [Canada-Israel Committee] Commends the Conservative Party, the Liberal Party and the Bloc Quebecois for Denouncing Israeli Apartheid Week and Condemns the NDP for Refusing To Do So.

While it is clear that the Uppal motion condemning Israeli Apartheid Week failed, as Marky Mark pointed out, the vote was unrecorded. Would it have been a voice vote? Nevertheless, the above suggests that support/dissent fell entirely along party-lines. I'm not sure how the CIC could know that.

Deborah Gray: FemiNazi!!!

You're right, sister: men and wymmyn are treated different. If I'd tried that shit I would have been tazed and arrested!

Helena Guerigis--Alleged Assassin

In which I lower the discourse with this totally gratuitous reminder of Ms. Guergis' long history of allegedly Diva-ish behavior.

Mind you, she is hot.

Tim Uppal's Motion Fails

No MSM coverage yet, but Tim Uppal's anti-Israeli Apartheid Week motion has been defeated.

Which makes me happy, for reasons I've given here.

Would this have been a voice vote where its impossible to who voted which way? Presumably it would have been non-whipped.

Latest IOP Retreat

It all began with a stem-winder of a statement from the U.K. Institute of Physics to the U.K. Science and Technology Committee in which they, among other things, suggested that the non-U.K. scientists who had been drawn into the CRUC Hack controversy should also be investigated by the Committee--in other words, that the committee should start an international witch hunt rather than just a national one. Well, this got the IOP into no end of trouble, especially after the role of climate changer denier Peter Gill in crafting the original statement came to light. On their main web-Page, the IOP issued not one but two "clarifications" of their first statement, in which they jettison some of the wilder charges in that statement while claiming to stand behind the basic principles contained within it. Until yesterday. Yesterday, moving the issue to the IOP blog, a third clarification was issued. This one doesn't add much to the other two, but does touch on process issues. In other words, how did the original piece of crap manage to sale through the process to see the light of day in the first place. Best bits:

In its statement, the Institute says that the evidence submitted to parliament followed “the process we always use for agreeing documents of this kind", noting that it submits 40 to 50 evidence statements to parliamentary inquiries per year. "We asked the energy sub-group of our Science Board to prepare the evidence, based on its analysis of material that is in the public domain following the hacking of the CRU e-mails last year," says the IOP. "The draft was circulated to the Science Board, which is a formal committee of the Institute with delegated authority from its trustees to oversee its policy work, and approved. However, we are already reviewing our consultation process for preparing policy submissions, and the comments we have received on this submission reinforce the need to make sure our procedures are as robust as possible."

The Institute also says it "strongly rebuts" accusations of “being overly influenced by one ‘climate-change sceptic’ on the energy sub-group, and then of a lack of openness about the authorship of our evidence". It adds that "The individual in question had no significant influence on the preparation of the evidence. Responsibility for the evidence rests with our Science Board, whose members’ names are openly available on our website."

Now the weird thing is: I can't find the new "statement" quoted here on the main website, although its early and I may just be missing something. But it seems as though the IOP is trying to shuffle the whole controversy off the main-stage.

Lisa Raitt On Twitter

h/t

Pig Roast Pics Stick Sask. Party Hicks!

...and Brad Wall apologizes.

Speaking Of Trips To Israel

Gruending on the National House of Prayer's (NHOP) walk to Israel. they're off to prepare for the end times. Yippy! Gruending manages to work this fact into the context of the Harper's govs. recent actions re KAIROS and Rights and Democracy:

The government’s ham-fisted actions against KAIROS and Rights and Democracy have sent an intended chill through Canada’s church and development communities. Question the policies of the Israeli government and you are called anti-Semitic. Question the policies of the Canadian government and you will be punished. These attacks have led others, including former Canadian diplomat Harry Stirling, to question why the kind of debate that occurs regularly within Israel about the country’s policies toward its neighbours is labelled as anti-Semitic when it occurs in Canada.

A common analysis is that in its policies and practices the Harper government is attempting to win the support of Jewish organizations and voters in this country. It may be, however, that an even more important reason for the government’s one-sided policy is its desire to appease its base among the Christian right – those who actually believe that a biblical prophecy of end times will be fulfilled by the Israeli hegemony in the Middle East.

Of course, Christian reconstructionists like the folks at NHOP believe that only those who have accepted Christ as their personal saviour will be saved in the Last Judgement. So, presumably, when the last trumpet sounds, the majority of Israelis are going to be screwed.

They Shoot Climate Scientists, Don't They?

If you think this is exaggerated, just remember: Morano's been advocating whippins lately.

Five Foot In The Holy Land

The Canadian Israel Committee (CIC) has, in its wisdom, chosen to send Kathy Shaidle (Five Foot), husband Arnie, and Kate from SDA off to Israel to...I don't know quite what--wander around and be terribly zealous, I suppose. Arnie describes their arrival:

We arrived in Tel Aviv at 6pm after a 12 hour direct flight & met up with our guide Uri and our Mossad controller, from there we drove straight to Jerusalem, checked in to the hotel and on to dinner where we met with Yossi Klein Halevi of the Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies.

Later, when asked to say a few words, Kathy noted that:

[Sikhs are b]ackward foreigners [who] shit on hand that feeds them...Unable to invent their own iconic product due to too much time spent worshipping monkeys and cows, setting women on fire and obsessing over imperceptible differences in each other's skin colour..."

And when asked about South African Apartheid, she responded: Was it all bad?

Hubby Arnie noted wittily that "Our culture is better that their culture.", and Kate quietly contemplated the "Muslim Problem".

The CIC must be so proud.

Welcome crazy people from SDA! Update here!

Who You Would Destroy, You Must First Defund

...is I think how that one goes. If the Tories were really sceptical, the logical course would be to support The Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory (PEARL) , as it is collecting data on the changing climate of the Far North. Instead, there will be a gap of several years until their High Arctic research station is complete, and by that time all the scientists capable of running it will have left the country. So: a shiny empty building in he middle of the tundra. Tory environmental policy in a nutshell.

Prominent Catholic: Citizenship Guide Not Non-Gay Enough!

Catholic Insight's Fr. Alphonse de Valk say:

...we suggest that in the next printing the picture of “gay” activist Mark Tewkesbury which is still in the guide, be replaced by one of our gold medallists of the Vancouver 2010 Olympics.

Presumably one of the non-gay ones, which may rule out the women's hockey team. My wife--who teaches skating--tells me Scott Moir is probably okay ( he wants to join a police S.W.A.T team, which is a usually good sign, although on the downside he obviously likes dancing), but the rest of our figure skating team is a writeoff.

A Little Off, Perhaps

...for a pig-roast?

h/t

All Hail The Magnificently Ugly Baribusa

God you're sexxxy! And those horns are so sick the baribusa can
IMPALE ITS OWN HEAD ON THEM!!!

PS. I am avoiding any "mother-in-law" cheap shots, but if your pet name for mom is The War Pig I'm sure a few will occur to you naturally.

They Clenched For Canada

Let Jeff explain it.

Wayne LaPierre Is Sooo Happy

As my friend and colleague Dave Kopel, research director of the Independence Institute in Colorado, astutely noted, "Repeal of the Canadian registry would be of tremendous global significance. Repeal would also shatter the claim by the Canadian gun prohibition lobby that gun control in Canada is an irreversible ratchet."

This is huge on the world stage and made all the more significant as a backdrop in the pending debate on the United Nations' global gun ban.

Wayne LePierre, author of the above, is EVP of the National Rifle Association. It's worth noting that he thinks Bill C-391 will pass 3rd reading with roughly the same votes it got last time around.

Torture Whistle Blower's Carr Center Position Was Funded By Tobacco Company Front Group--And Iggy Approved The Money!

I am not sure that the following should sway anyone one way or another re Amir Attaran's claim the Canadian government collaborated with Afghan security forces to have prisoners tortured in order to gather intelligence, but it is plenty weird and intriguing and I thought I would write it up.

Amir Attaran is (or was) a member of the Africa Fighting Malaria (AFM) advisory board. Africa Fighting Malaria is a group associated with the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) and more specifically with think tank "scientist" extraordinaire Roger Bate, who is the group's inspiration and driving force. Even more importantly, when Attaran was at Harvard (the Carr Center) his position was funded by a grant from Africa Fighting Malaria.

Now, what's wrong with that? Well, whenever you hear the name "American Enterprise Institute" your bullshit meter should start twitching just from general principles. These guys are one of America's best known Conservative think tanks, and have, for example, led the charge against meaningful climate change legislation south of the border.

But, again, there's a more specific story to be told, and a strange one too.

Roger Bate's career as a think tank scientist extends back several decades, but his most notable exploit is the creation of Africa Fighting Malaria. Put briefly, and as Mr. Bate put it fairly explicitly to Philip Morris back in 1998, the group was created to be a front generating a counter-discourse intended to discourage further regulation of the tobacco industry. To quote Adam Sarvana, in one of the very few MSM articles I've seen written on Mr. Bate:

Now operating out of the conservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI), [Roger]Bate’s signature coup to date has been to spread the myth that environmentalists, by preventing the use of the pesticide DDT (Dichloro-Diphenyl-Trichloroethane) to kill mosquitoes in developing countries, have heartlessly caused millions of malaria deaths worldwide. It needs to be said at the outset that this argument is untrue. While some groups have pressed hard to find alternatives, there is little evidence that a concerted effort to abolish anti-malaria DDT spraying ever occurred. Of the few environmental organizations that even pay attention to pesticide use overseas, the ones with any clout all support a clause in the Stockholm Convention that allows DDT use for public health reasons.

[...]

The latter is of particular importance in Bate’s case. His most visible contribution to his chosen cause has been to use the unlikely twin forces of malaria and DDT – both absent from the United States for decades, but facts of life in much of the developing world – to pit potential allies in regulatory efforts, especially environmentalists and public health advocates, against each other in an effort to draw their fire away from regulated industries, including tobacco. In a funding proposal to Philip Morris laying out his vision of a so-called Malaria Strategy, Bate wrote circa 1998 that the “opponents” of tobacco “are quite disparate, yet we have not divided them and shown each how the other’s agenda is damaging their own.” To be more successful, the document said, “we need to . . . [p]ick issues on which we can divide our opponents and win. Make our case on our terms, not on the terms of our opponents – malaria prevention is a good example. Show our opponents where their alleged allies are harming their cause[.]”

The proposal laid out a comprehensive plan, including the formation of a front group to push the idea that Western experts and activists were focusing on the wrong issue. The central argument of the Malaria Strategy, he wrote, would be that “environmental regulations often harm public health in the West and Western policies often harm health in Less Developed Countries.” In other words, the World Health Organization (WHO) and other regulatory bodies shouldn’t even have time to think about regulating American and British tobacco, because the scourge of malaria demanded more immediate attention. Thus emerged Bate’s thesis, which he continues to promote as a proxy for his deeper anti-regulatory agenda: That out-of-touch bureaucrats and misguided environmentalists are ignoring malaria sufferers, either because of incompetence or spoiled-rich fears about comparatively harmless risks like second-hand smoking, and are therefore not to be trusted.

Now, if this sounds too wild to be true, it can all be pretty thoroughly referenced. The Legacy Tobacco Documents Library, kept at the University of California, San Francisco,

...holds 40 million pages of secret corporate memos, privileged legal communications and other documents obtained through discovery processes from a decade of successful lawsuits alleging that the industry had lied about tobacco’s health effects. The documents demonstrate how the industry pioneered modern techniques for manipulating politics, scientific research and public opinion. As a result, the library is something of a Rosetta Stone that reaches beyond the tobacco industry to assist anyone seeking to decipher how business, politics and media function.

One of the first people to really go trolling through these documents on the trail of Mr. Bate was climate blogger Eli Rabbet. It's thanks to him that, for example, we know that at some point Phillip Morris UK was paying Roger Bate £10K per month for his services.

So this is who Mr. Attaran has worked with in the past--here's him talking up DDT and trashing environmentalists--and whose position, back in 2002-2003, was

...funded through a secret anonymous grant, that was given to Roger Bate's Africa Fight Malaria group, and then to Harvard.

Okay, so how does Michael Ignatieff play into all of this? Well, in 2003 then he was director of The Carr Center, and when a stink was raised over Mr. Attaran's anonymous funding sources (which were thought at the time to be linked to "Big Pharma"), he was forced to look into the matter and respond:

Before accepting any funding for projects, the Carr Center does necessary due diligence upon the source of the funding. This was true in the case of Amir Attaran, as it is with all of our research funding. When appropriate, we examine not only the immediate source of the funds, but the original source as well. In Amir Attaran's case, the direct source of the funding for his tenure at the Carr Center was Africa Fighting Malaria, but we did not stop our due diligence there. Instead, we required that the specific funding supporting Dr. Attaran's research be traced to its original source(s). When the individual donor who was the to be the source of the funding sought to maintain anonymity, we indicated to AFM that we would then be unable to accept the funding. Appreciating our need for due diligence, AFM then agreed that his/her identity could be revealed to the two of us and to the individual in the Harvard University Administration responsible for due diligence on donors wishing to remain anonymous. Due diligence by both the Carr Center and the University was done on this individual. Of course, we cannot provide you with a name because of our respect for donor requests for anonymity, but - with regard to your specific concerns - you have our assurances that we know this individual's identity, that we have done due diligence upon the source of the money, and that it is not from the pharmaceutical industry nor from any source that would involve a conflict of interest. Neither AFM nor the anonymous donor have imposed any restrictions whatever on Dr. Attaran's research. We trust that this addresses your concerns.

In other words, Iggy investigated the source of Attaran's funding, and despite its dubious pedigree, took the money.

Now, I don't know what this says about Attaran's claim re Afghan prisoner transfers. Probably nothing. And I would say in both his and Iggy's defense that Bate and the AFM have conned a lot of smart people. James Lovelock comes to mind. Bate is not at all like Marc Morano, who looks greasy and sweaty even when he isn't doing anything evil. No, nobody's even heard of Bate; he's smooth and silent, like a barracuda swimming through the ocean at night.

But, Iggy, a word of advice. When anything associated with the American Enterprise Institute comes along waving money--or anyone connected with "think tanks" that have names like "The Liberty Foundation" or "The Freedom initiative"--run away. They're flogging bullshit.

And if Roger Bate gets within a mile of you, run away screaming.

PS. Attaran responds to some of the allegations re Iggy's defense of his funding here. Although nobody seems to have raised the "big tobacco" connection as yet.

PPS. A big welcome to National Newswatch readers.

PPPS. It has been pointed out to me that my original title suggests that Mr. Attaran's current position, and his research into the Afghan detainee issue, was funded by Africa Fighting Malaria. That was not the intent and I have changed the title to remove the implication. In fact, as I note, the two issues are not connected other than I found out about the second while reading about the first.

Notable For Its Absence

Has any mention been made at the PCPO AGM of Hudak's leadership-race promise to abolish the OHRC? I've mentioned previously that Tim seemed to have thrown that one under the bus as a political loser. Perhaps I have been confirmed.

Maxime's New Biker Chick?

She's hot, whoever she is.

The Meaning Of Leeds-Grenville

Tim Hudak:

"It's a very strong message from the eastern Ontario ridings (that) they're looking for change," Hudak said Friday as he arrived at the party's annual meeting in Ottawa – his first since taking the party's helm last spring.

Some dude from Free Dominion:

My riding is on auto pilot with regards to voting - the Tories could have ran a dead chicken and still won.

I believe the dude.

Iggy And The Christians

Specifically, Iggy and his attempts at outreach into various sectors of the Canadian Christian community:

On coming into the Liberal leadership, however, [Iggy] recognized that, in the past few decades, some of his party members had become increasingly derisive of evangelical Christians -- and, to a lesser extent, Roman Catholics. That vitriol was especially directed at Christian politicians with Conservative or Reform party connections. Leaders like Stockwell Day were described as "scary," especially with respect to their pro-life or pro-creationist viewpoints.

[...]

The decline in the number of Liberal federal seats in rural and small-city Ontario could be traced, statistically, to the favour with which evangelicals were viewing the Conservatives. That happened especially after the merger of the Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservative parties.

So Iggy has asked Toronto-area MP John McKay to act as his agent among the believers:

While articulating strongly why he believes evangelical and Catholic Christians should be supportive of the federal Liberals, McKay took care not to be corrosively critical of the Conservatives. He did caution, however, that what he sees as the current Conservative penchant to "lock up the pro-Israel and evangelical votes," as heading in a "dangerous" direction.

[...]

An interesting challenge for McKay has been to build networks with Christians who are unhappy with Ignatieff's insistence that maternal and child health in less developed countries should include support for abortion and contraception.

[...]

Earlier reports had indicated that Liberal strategists had recommended Ignatieff take a pro-abortion stance as a means of establishing a wedge issue among Conservatives.

I blame Kinsella and that damn doll of his.

The Institute Of Physics Regrets...

The IOP wriggles a bit more, clarifying their original clarification. I've juxtaposed some of the March 2 vs. March 5 passages:

March 2:

The Institute’s statement, which has been published both on the Institute’s website and the Committee’s, has been interpreted by some individuals to imply that it does not support the scientific evidence that the rising concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is contributing to global warming.

March 5:

We regret that our submission has been seized upon by some individuals to imply that IOP does not support the scientific evidence that the rising concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is contributing to global warming.

March 2:

That is not the case. The Institute’s position on climate change is clear: the basic science is well enough understood to be sure that our climate is changing – and that we need to take action now to mitigate that change. More information about IOP’s views can be found on its website here.

March 5:

IOP’s position on global warming is clear: the basic science is well established and there is no doubt that climate change is happening and that we should be taking action to address it now.

This passage from March 2:

It reflected our belief that the open exchange of data, procedures and materials is fundamental to the scientific process. From the information already in the public domain it appears that these principles have been put at risk in the present case, and that this has undermined the trust that is placed in the scientific process.

...is replaced by something milder on March 5th:

The evidence to the Committee was focused however on the need to maintain the integrity, openness and unbiased nature of the scientific process. The key points it makes are ones to which we are deeply committed – ie that science should be communicated openly and reviewed in an unbiased way. However much we sympathise with the way in which CRU researchers have been confronted with hostile requests for information, we believe the case for openness remains just as strong.

And a bit on procedures missing from the March 2 edition:

The preparation of the evidence followed the process we always use for agreeing documents of this kind. We asked the Energy Sub-Group of our Science Board to prepare the evidence, based on their analysis of the material which is already in the public domain. The evidence was then circulated around Science Board, which is a formal committee of the Institute with delegated authority from its trustees to oversee its policy work, and approved.

The actual submission, mind you (and I haven't gone through it thoroughly), does NOT seem to have changed. They are still calling for a broader inquiry to cover those researchers not associated with CRU but who might have conspired with them.

Tough On Crime, Tough On The Criminal Justice System

Put more people in jail for longer; pay the jailer less. And watch the sparks fly, I suppose.

If Its Consensus, It's Not Science

Except when it is! Those crazy paleontologists!

IOP Statement Authors Still Anonymous

So where we left this story was: the U.K.'s Institute of Physics wrote an extremely critical statement in regards to the University of East Anglia's handling of FOI requests from climate change sceptics, and submitted it to the U.K. Science and Technology Committee, who have been investigating various issues behind the CRU hack. Later they issued a "clarification" of the statement designed to make it sound a little less nutty. But when asked who the actual authors of the original piece were, the IOP clammed up, other than to say they were part of the IOP's energy sub-group...whose members they refused to identify!

As W. Connolley wrote, what had mostly likely happened was that the energy sub-group was "hijacked" by deniers, who then composed their statement and managed to steer it through the larger administrative structure of the IOP and land it on the desk of the committee.

And then it was was discovered by me (I think), here on this blog, that the identity of one of the sub-group's members was one Peter Gill, who had more than a sniff of denialism about him.

Cue the U.K. Gaurdian's David Adam: yeah, it turns out Peter Gill is a Warmocaust Collusionist and, yeah, he was "involved" in the preparation of the IOP document, but the IOP won't get more specific, and still won't say who the other sub-group members are. Their reasoning is, to put it mildly, bizarre:

The institute supplied a statement from an anonymous member of its science board, which said: "The institute should feel relaxed about the process by which it generated what is, anyway, a statement of the obvious." It added: "The points [the submission] makes are ones which we continue to support, that science should be practised openly and in an unbiased way. However much we sympathise with the way in which CRU researchers have been confronted with hostile requests for information, we believe the case for openness remains just as strong."

...which is to say that the the IOP feels comfortable issuing anonymous demands for scientific openness.

More coverage here.

Throne Speech Indicates Move Towards Income Splitting?

While the details will not be determined until the budget or respective legislation is tabled, we are encouraged by government’s commitment to strengthen the Universal Child Care Benefit for “sole-support, single-parent families.” Dave Quist, Executive Director of the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada states, “this appears to be the first significant step towards family income splitting.”

And here's the official throne speech "word cloud", courtesy of the NP:
If I were a small gov. Conservative, I'd be worried.

I Would Find It Hard To Sing That

Apparently, the original 2nd line of Canada's national anthem was "True patriot love thou dost in us command," which does not trip lightly off the modern tongue. In any case, count me among the 8% of Canadians (in this not particularly scientific poll) who totally don't care, although if push came to shove I'd prefer if the Hendrix performance was made the official version. You can just hum along to it or play air-guitar.

Tony Clement, however, is bullshitting:

"The prime minister has heard from some Canadians on this and I think it’s better to have a fulsome debate, rather than just shuffling it off," Clement said Wednesday.

Clement said he has heard complaints from some of his constituents as recently as last week.

"I think this has been rolling around for a while actually," said the MP from Parry Sound, Ont.

"Maybe it was a bit subterranean . . . . (But) we got so used to singing O Canada at the Olympics, maybe it became more top of mind, I don’t know."

Yeah, after jobs, unemployment, the environment, transfer payments, the deficit, Afghanistan, reasonable accommodation, the seal hunt, what's gonna happen next on "Lost", the fate of the Salt Spring Island brown nosed ferret, the Theodore Sask. mayoral race...practically everyone in the nation has been sweating over ways to make our already mondo boring national anthem even less singable.

What a time waster! And how is it possible for the Harper gov. to be even more idea-less than they were last go-round?

KAIROS Struggles On

I don't know why so much of the activity on this issue seems to be coming from the West Coast, but kudos to the Salt Spring United Church for not letting go of the bone:

This coming Sunday, March 7 at Salt Spring United Church, there will be a photo event to appeal for restoration of funding to Kairos from CIDA (Canadian International Development Agency).

[...]

The photo of the banner and supporting group, plus an accompanying article, will probably appear in the following week’s Driftwood. This will be forwarded on to CIDA.

Kairos Controversey Sideswipes B.C. B&B

If you want to see how toxic Jason Kenney's musings re KAIROS and anti-semitism have been, here's the owner Kairos Guest Suite near Comox, who feel's its necessary to tell folks that they are not those people.

Minister Kenney, you must be so proud.

U.K. Institute Of Physics Sort Of Retracts

Of all the nutty submissions placed before the U.K. Science and Technology Committee, this stem-winder from the U.K. Institute of Physics--which seemed to suggest, among other things, that there had been wrong-doing not only among the UEA's Climate Research Unit (CRU, headed by Phil Jones), but among the international scientists that swapped emails with the CRU team--was the most disturbing. It sounded like a prank, or perhaps the work of a small group within the IoP that had hijacked the organization to send out denialist literature under its name (remember the infiltration of the APS?).

At the moment, option number two looks most likely, for yesterday the IoP felt the need to issue a reinterpretation of their original statement:

The Institute's statement, which has been published both on the Institute's website and the Committee's, has been interpreted by some individuals to imply that it does not support the scientific evidence that the rising concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is contributing to global warming.

That is not the case. The Institute's position on climate change is clear: the basic science is well enough understood to be sure that our climate is changing – and that we need to take action now to mitigate that change.

The U.K. Gaurdian has written about this sudden turnabout; the best bit from their story:

The institute statement says its submission was approved by its science board, a formal committee of experts that oversees its policy work.

The Guardian has been unable to find a member of the board that supports the submission. Two of the scientists listed as members said they had declined to comment on a draft submission prepared by the institute, because they were not climate experts and had not read the UEA emails. Others would not comment or did not respond to enquiries.

An institute spokesperson said the submission was "strongly supported" by three members of the board. "All members were invited to comment. Only a few did, all concerned approved [the submission] unanimously."

So, nobody can find the people that wrote the submission??? The bottom line--as reported by Stoat (that's Connelley)--seems to be that a small "Energy sub-group" within the IoP science group managed to slip this stuff passed the larger IoP leadership. You can read about their "sceptical" credentials at Stoat's place.

And it seems the reinterpretation has been inspired by a backlash from within the IoP membership that is, even now, being conveyed to IoP poobahs behind the scenes. But I would agree that it isn't really enough. The story of the IoP condemnation of CRU has gone international; the organization has been made fools of, and their new statement amounts to a bit of "we didn't really mean what we clearly said" arse covering. They should issue a complete and thorough retraction of their first statement, and an apology to everyone involved.

PS. One of the IOP's mysterious Energy sub-group members appears to be Peter Gill. His sceptics creds include supporting Nigel Lawson's efforts to address the IOP. Also, Feroze Duggan appears to have been a member of the group until at least 2008. Also, Dr John Roberts of University of Sheffield was recently a part of the sub-group, though perhaps not currently.

The Canadian Arctic In A Warming World

Something that'll make you go "hmmm", from Cleo Paskal's Global Warring: How Environmental, Economic, and Political Crises Will Redraw the World Map:

Canada currently claims the Northwest Passage as part of its territorial waters, but this assertion is being contested by the US and European Union, which want it recognized as an international strait so that they can have unfettered access for their own commercial interests, such as oil and gas exploration. This standoff, Paskal suggests, could prod Canada to explore a strategic relationship with Russia, which has its own designs on the Arctic. Meanwhile, China is knocking at Canada's door, eager to purchase a slice of the country's abundant natural resources. In a 'stateless' Northwest Passage, Russia and China could end up being the big players, especially if they forge stronger economic ties to Canada. This potential development, Paskal argues, poses a long-term security risk to the EU and US.

Will we be fighting off the yanks with our Chinese and Russian brothers? Sounds unlikely, but threatened protectionist measures against the tar sands already seem to have a "lets take Chinese money to build a pipe-line to the West coast and sell them our dirty oil" sentiment among prairie conservatives. And I do so love their honey buns.

Your Tax Dollars At Work!!

KELOWNA, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwire - March 1, 2010) - On behalf of the Honourable James Moore, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, Ron Cannan, Member of Parliament (Kelowna–Lake Country), today announced funding for APV Publishing, which publishes 4WD magazine.

This funding (about $21,000) from the Canadian Periodical Fund, which in an earlier incarnation provided monies for small circ. Lit. magazines of the kind that have launched the careers of so many Canadian authors.

Pic from...

Marc Morano Wields the Whip!

While Senator Inhofe just wants to jail climate scientists, Marc Morano prefers a rougher style of justice:

"I seriously believe we should kick them while they're down," [Morano] said. "They deserve to be publicly flogged."

This comes very close to advocating violence against climate scientists. Its getting close to Delingpole territory. Given that Morano's followers tend to lie at the "tea-bagger" end of the political spectrum, the possibility of violent acts against scientists being committed is not outside the realm of possibility.

Preserve Those Tapes!!!

Because there are still questions to be answered:

1) Did Helena call PEI a "hellhole" or a "shit-hole"? Early reports were ambiguous.
2) What kind of boots was she wearing?

3) Was alcohol involved?
3) Did the process of disrobing extend beyond Helena's boots?
4) Was the "level of verbal abuse and disorderly conduct" Helena employed enough to land her time in Club Fed(though not, apparently, enough to get her booted from cabinet)?

Inquiring minds want to know.

So Far So Good

The first day passes, and no boots are thrown.

Guergis planned to stick strictly to the rule that she speak for no longer than three minutes, her handlers said.

Actually, most of Harper's cabinet ministers start to drool and make giggly noises after about 90 seconds, so you know why he wants to hang on to Helena.

Spinelessness Confirmed!

Iggy on Israeli Apartheid Week. Looks like the party will fall in line:

On university campuses across the country this week, Israeli Apartheid Week will once again attempt to demonize and undermine the legitimacy of the Jewish state. It is part of a global campaign of calls for divestment, boycotts and proclamations, and it should be condemned unequivocally and absolutely.

Yes, lets condemn the issuing of proclamations. And, yes, let's condemn calls for product(?) boycotts, because damn it nobody has the right to spend their own money as they see fit.

Canada Withholding Climate Data!

Coverage of the Science and Technology Committee's hearings brought out one neat little factlet: Canada is one of the countries that will not allow the University of East Anglia to reproduce the raw data from its weather stations. They would prefer you contact the Canadian source for this data (presumably Environment Canada?). Maybe Mr. Bernier, in an effort to quell the scepticism that gnaws at his heart, will suggest to his Prime Minister that this information be made available by Canada to any revamped central data-base that these various U.K. committees finally recommend creating.

Say No To Tim Uppal's Motion

That this House considers itself to be a friend of the State of Israel; that this House is concerned about expressions of anti-Semitism under the guise of "Israeli Apartheid Week"; and that this House explicitly condemns any action in Canada as well as internationally that would equate the State of Israel with the rejected and racist policy of apartheid.

Because some good people say it is an apartheid state, and some say it ain't, and some (like myself) think the phrase is an exaggeration that hides a germ of truth. None of us needs the federal government to step in and offer guidance on the issue.

(PS. What will actualy happen when the motion--which has no legal force--is introduced? I suspect gutlessness, at least from the Liberal benches. I would like to be pleasantly surprised.)

Whatcott Triumphant

One-time Free-D denizon "Wild" Bill Whatcott, who I've written about here, has won his appeal in the Whatcott vs. Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal case:

In a decision released February 25, the 3-member court ruled that William Whatcott did not violate section 14(1)(b) of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code by distributing flyers to oppose the teaching of homosexuality in Saskatoon’s public schools.

The decision, which I haven't read, is here. From the Canadian Constitution Foundation's (CCF) response, it doesn't sound like it touches on the constitutionality of the law.

Kids Today

Reminds me of my youth, but this pair are wallowing in decadence!!! WTF good is a sniper-scope when the point is to clear a crowded street? These two are stylin', going in for a useless affectaction, a non-functional status symbol...at least as far as I'm concerned.

Calgary And The Aryan Guard: Why There?

Crazy thing: some of it [old style anti-Semitism] is being inflamed however tacitly, by some of Israel’s staunchest supporters. Chief among them: the immigration minister himself, Jason Kenney, and good buddy Ezra Levant, flagbearer of the Western Standard.

Unlike other groups in the “movement,” the Guard does not exist completely online, where it’s safer – as long as you’re careful not to contravene anti-hate laws – and easier to reach more people.

These skins are not afraid to show their true colours, taking to the streets at annual “white pride” rallies, tossing Molotov cocktails through the windows of anti-racists (no good communists?), planting a pipe bomb or two on the doorstep of wayward former members.

What makes them think they can get away with it?

Enter Levant. The former Reformer and Canadian Alliance disciple has been flogging that canard pretty hard ever since the Standard, his news and views mag (now online only) republished the infamous Muhammad cartoons in 2006. Talk about stirring an anti-Jewish backlash.

[...]

Is it any wonder then that groups like the Aryan Guard feel some measure of protection from the authorities, despite their blatantly racist views?

I would also note that in the run-up to the passing of Alberta's Bill 44, which would have in its original form rescinded the hate speech provisions from that provinces human rights act--a repeal which Ezra supported enthusiastically--white supremacists were actively trying to recruit followers to the Calgary area, arguing that after 44 passed it would become land of The Free for Neo-Nazis. Only after an Aryan Guard beefed-up with new recruits marched last year did the province back down from the repeal.

Even More FOI Follies: UEA Vs. ICO

From the University of East Anglia (UEA):

“The point Professor Acton [whose statements I've referenced here and here] was making is that there has been no investigation so no decision, as was widely reported. The ICO read e-mails and came to assumptions but has not investigated or demonstrated any evidence that what may have been said in emails was actually carried out.”

Also, UEA has issued the following updated statement:

These confirm that no further evidence had been sought or obtained by the ICO with regard to an alleged breach of Section 77 and that with regard to the Section 50 complaint no decision notice had been issued and no alleged breaches had been put to the University for comment. Any assertion that the University has been found in breach of any part the Freedom of Information Act is incorrect. The ICO had not communicated with the University before issuing the statement and has still not completed any investigations into this matter. Media reports have been inaccurate.

They've also published their correspondence with the Information Commissioner's Office. This first one from the 29th lodges what seems to me to be a perfectly valid complaint in regards to the ICO's original statement:

I do not think it is acceptable that such a statement which has led to an extremely damaging commentary on the University in the press, on radio and television and from the Chairman of the Parliamentary Science and Technology Select Committee was first communicated to the University by a journalist. As far as I can ascertain (and you did not disagree) there was no effort by the ICO to inform the University before the release was made.

Mr. Holland has submitted a complaint to the ICO, the University has sought to cooperate fully with you in your consideration of the complaint and our past experience (albeit limited) has been that we have been informed of the investigating officer’s initial conclusions and the reasons for them, to give us the opportunity to make submissions well before a decision notice is issued. We thought this to be the normal practice. In this instance we have been informed of a decision through the pages of the press with no understanding of the breaches which you allege to have occurred and the evidence which is being relied upon, and with no opportunity to put forward an informed defence.

And here is the call for a retraction:

You expressed at least some appreciation of our view that communicating the conclusions of the ICO in this way is entirely inappropriate. I would ask that you acknowledge that the actions of the ICO were not appropriate in this instance, and preferably by return.

You said that, while you had not had the opportunity to review fully the press coverage, it was possible that a number of inferences may have been drawn by commentators which went beyond any conclusions which you might think reasonable or were intended to be drawn from your statement. If this remains the case, I would ask that you issue a further press statement today to clarify that fact before we suffer further damage.

The ICO did not issue a retraction, but did offer a weakened statement that they said their original statement should be read to mean (as I argued here). Acton makes this clear in a final letter, dated February 1st:

Your clarification that the press cannot infer from your statement to the Sunday Times that it has been established that the University (or indeed any individual associated with the University) has breached the terms of the Freedom of Information Act is welcome. As your observations related to the Holland case the reference in some of the papers that your statement referred to “refusing to hand over raw data” must also be incorrect, as were the references to unlimited fines.

So there you have it. My verdict: the ICO jumped the gun in making their press statement, and is now trying to wriggle out of it without issuing a further statement that would make them look stupid.

FOI Fight: UEA VS. ICO

...and if you don't know what all the acronyms mean, you shouldn't be here.

Anyway, yesterday we learned more of the circumstances around the tiff between the U.K. Commissioner's office (ICO) and the University of East Anglia (UEA) over e-mails made public by the CRU Hack. Back in January, the ICO issued a statement in which they suggested that that the UEA had been in breach of Section 77 of the U.K. FOIA (Freedom of Information Act). The UEA responded to their statement with a demand for a retraction, and got this letter (though no retraction) from the ICO, which the UEA claims demonstrates that "the evidence the ICO had in mind about whether there was a breach was no more than prima facie." A couple of things:

1) The ICO argues that their original statement "may be read" to suggest that their evidence is merely prima facie, though that term does not appear in the original statement.

2) They blame any misinterpretation of the statement on...wait for it...Jonathon Leake, of Leakegate infamy.

Errors like this are frequently made in press reports and the ICO cannot be expected to correct them, particularly when the ICO has not itself referred to penalties or sanctions in its own statement.

For all the above reasons the ICO will not be issuing a further press statement covering these points. The ICO does not wish to encourage further media reports on the matter, indeed our original press statement was only drafted for one journalist [Jonathon Leake] in response to a specific enquiry.

Although, frankly Mr. Leake may be getting a bum deal in this case; it is not obvious that the ICO statement should be interpreted as the ICO now suggests.

h/t

More Tories Gone Rogue On Abortion

Tory MPs Brad Trost and Maurice Vellacott speak out on the A-word! Note a couple of things here. The editorial they reference argues that:

...aid groups have argued for years that real progress can't be made until women are given the education, resources and support to decide for themselves when to get and stay pregnant.

...which is to say its author's are also talking about such things as providing contraceptive options. Brad and Maurice make it all about abortion (as have most Tory responses to Iggy's recent statements. It looks like a deliberate tactic.). Secondly, their "evidence" seem to be derived from stories published at The Lifesite on Maternal Mortality levels. As you can see, Lifesite's been running a bunch of them lately. So one can legitimately question its accuracy.

Helena Guergis Loses Her Way!

Putting on airs! Yelling at the plebes! Oh my! Helena Guergis ain't one with Der Volk at all these days! Next she'll be drinking the gay coffee at Satanbucks.

PS. Charlottetown is not a hell-hole! Its too small.

Green Party Prepares To Self-Immolate

Council has voted to draft a motion to amend the Part by-laws regarding a leadership race to submit to the membership at the August BGM in Toronto. In the interim, the Leadership race fairness committee has been tasked to prepare the terms and conditions of the race. These terms and conditions will be predicated on the terms and conditions of the last race. For those interested, Steve Kisby chairs that committee, and I’ll publish the names and email addresses of all the members in an upcoming post.

Dear Green Party members: Elizabeth May is way too good for you. If she should lose any silly little leadership race, or decide that's its really not worth playing den mother to a gang of ungrateful children for about $50,000 a year and refuse to participate, then you will be truly fucked, returned to square one, raising funds by holding salmon bakes and selling magic mushrooms out of the back of your old Volkswagen van.

For the less addled among you, may I suggest this alternative.

University Of East Anglia Strikes Back

Their entire submission to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Science and Technology can be found here. As to the earlier claim from the U.K. Information Commisioner's Office (ICO) that UEA breached the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act), this is where that seems to stand:

3.7.6 On 22 January 2010, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) released a statement to a journalist, which was widely misinterpreted in the media as a finding by the ICO that UEA had breached Section 77 of the FOIA by withholding raw data. A subsequent letter to UEA from the ICO (29 January 2010) indicated that no breach of the law has been established; that the evidence the ICO had in mind about whether there was a breach was no more than prima facie; and that the FOI request at issue did not concern raw data but private email exchanges.

More on that particular aspect of the investigation here.

And a bit more on the many, many vexatious FOI requests filed by the denialist community:

3.7.4 In July 2009 UEA received an unprecedented, and frankly administratively overwhelming, deluge of FOIA requests related to CRU. These amounted to 61 requests out of a 2009 total of 107 related to CRU, compared to annual totals of 2 in 2008 and 4 in 2007 (University totals for those years were 204, 72 and 44 respectively). Accordingly CRU approached the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS), an organization within the WMO, to see if it would request the WMO to seek permission from each of its members (the NMSs) for CRU to release the primary station data for each country. WMO declined, but indicated that the appropriate procedure was for the request to come from the UK NMS (the Met Office). The Met Office agreed this was the correct procedure, and sent a letter of support to accompany an explanatory letter to each NMS on 30 November 2009. As of 1 February 2010, 35 responses to 160 requests have been received from the NMSs. Most are positive, but some are negative (confirming the constraints preventing CRU releasing the requested data).

Brad Gets Rad

Brad Trost, that is, embracing a flat tax for Canada:

Nations and jurisdictions that have adopted flat-tax systems “with extraordinary success” include: Jersey (1940), Hong Kong (1947) and the Czech Republic (2008).

Maybe he's jealous of all the attention M. Bernier's been getting lately with some of his own radical proposals. Another hat in the ring for a post-Harper CPoC leadership race? Mad Max vs. Flat Brad?

PS. Jersey is not New Jersey, but this place (pop. 91,626).

Wells On Bernier

Maxime Bernier's "intervention" on climate change policy is maneuvering for a CPoC leadership run in a post Harper world.

PS. Maxime has expanded on his comments here. Just a quick remark in passing: the International Climate Science Coalition is NOT a collection of "serious researchers".

Tory Turmoil In Ontario?

On the resignation of Tim Hudak's media relations director Greg Medulun:

Given the poor results the PC's have had under the Hudak regime so far, (running an angry and unsuccessful campaign in St. Paul's, getting crushed in Toronto Centre, and now looking down the barrel at another defeat in the critical riding of Ottawa West-Nepean) and in particular, the very negative press which emerged following the PC tactics outside, and particularly inside the Legislature during the last sitting. Many in the caucus, particularly those on the Red Tory wing of the party and the more experienced MPP's, including such high profile figures such as Deputy Leader Christine Elliott, Education critic Elizabeth Witmer, and Chief Whip/Finance Critic/longest serving PC MPP, had expressed displeasure with the rough and tumble tactics of the Hudak/Hillier axis within the party, whose strategy was promoted by Medulun. With the Tories looking at a probable loss in an important swing riding of OW-N, could caucus unrest push more Hudakites out of the way as the more moderate wing of the party calls for a re-think of strategy?

On my! The Landowners will be displeased!

Hard Rockin Denier' Endorses CRU Data!!!

By night AGW Denier and Creationist Roy Spencer rocks out with his band Christian rock band EcoFreako. By day, he maintains the UAH (University of Alabama) database of daily satellite temperature readings .


Lately, Roy has been engaged in a little side-project--comparing CRU's surface readings to his satellite data to see how they match up. His preliminary conclusion:

I’ll have to admit I was a little astounded at the agreement between Jones’ and my analyses, especially since I chose a rather ad-hoc method of data screening that was not optimized in any way. Note that the linear temperature trends are essentially identical; the correlation between the monthly anomalies is 0.91.

Furthermore, and more specifically, there seems no evidence of an urban heat island effect:

Of course, an increasing urban heat island effect could still be contaminating both datasets, resulting in a spurious warming trend. Also, when I include years before 1986 in the analysis, the warming trends might start to diverge. But at face value, this plot seems to indicate that the rapid decrease in the number of stations included in the GHCN database in recent years has not caused a spurious warming trend in the Jones dataset — at least not since 1986. Also note that December 2009 was, indeed, a cool month in my analysis.

So: validation from a most unusual source. Unfortunately, the EcoFreako website seems to have disappeared. However, here's a link to MP3s of them playing "Earth Has A Fever" (sung to the tune of "Cat Scratch Fever", and "I Want To Mock Al Gore All Night", sung to the tune of...well, you figure it out.