It’s easy to claim “consensus” when you suppress dissenting voices (Times of London):
Research which heaped doubt on the rate of global warming was deliberately suppressed by scientists because it was “less than helpful” to their cause, it was claimed last night.
In an echo of the infamous “Climategate” scandal at the University of East Anglia, one of the world’s top academic journals rejected the work of five experts after a reviewer privately denounced it as “harmful”.
These were the exact words of the unnamed “scientist” (yes, I used scare quotes) who rejected the piece:
Actually it is harmful as it opens the door for oversimplified claims of “errors” and worse from the climate sceptics (UK sp) media side.
Oh yes. Heaven forbid we get oversimplified claims from the media. Oh, wait.
For those who are keeping track (admittedly not easy given the numbers), we have now reached forty-seven examples of data manipulation, errors, suppression, and other shenanigans from global warming alarmists, and that’s just from what I’ve been able to blog on this subject since Climategate broke in November of 2009, which is now about four and a half years ago…and here I thought they were slowing down.
Cross-posted to the right-wing liberal