On 15/12/09 10:26, Granity wrote:
AGW is now discredited due
to the behaviour of the leading players concerned

That's not so. I've read the first 100 of the emails from UEA and a
selection of those pointed at by skeptics. I can't find any evidence
that the conclusions on AGW are wrong. I've had skeptics point out
emails that they claim prove wrongdoing, but reading those emails
doesn't suggest that to me. What the emails do show is that one
particular scientist exaggerated the strength of some evidence on one
occasion, but even without that the evidence supported AGW. Other
scientists called him on it and it wasn't repeated.

The current state of play is that there is definitely a global warming
event taking place, acting over a timescale of 100-150 years and
accelerating. On balance of evidence it is highly probable that some
element of this is anthropogenic, but we don't know how much.



--
Bernard Peek