If you thought Bob McDonald's fence painting was good, he's merely Tom Sawyer, sitting and watching, compared to The Current on CBC radio this morning. (The podcast will show up here this afternoon.)
Here's the feedback I was moved to send them... Not that it will do any good of course.
I just listened to your interview with the 'expert' climate change historian regarding the CRU leaked emails and data. It was such an inaccurate, one-sided bundle of lies and half-truths, I hardly know where to start.
Firstly, the 'smoking gun' of the Climategate leak isn't in the emails, entertaining as they are. It's in the data and the source code of the programs used to build the climate models. Those aren't subject to interpretation in terms of frustration, or politicization. The comments in that source code and the programs themselves clearly show data tampering and manipulation.
Secondly, what the emails do show is evidence of a conspiracy to circumvent Freedom of Information laws. The UK's Information Commissioner is investigating what could become a criminal situation.
So much for the integrity of the scientists involved. Already all the raw data of the global temperature record has been deleted, leaving the world unable to duplicate or verify the CRUs 'quality controlled' temperature record.
Thirdly, the canard that there are other independent models and other independent scientists showing the same thing as the CRU. Do some reasearch. See how small the group of scientists working the *underlying* data really is, and how cosy they are with one another. See how they conspired to keep peer review to 'friendlies' and to even try to remove journal editors who didn't share their view. The scientific process was severely compromised and the scandal will in due course spread beyond East Anglia. Already Penn State is investigating Michael Mann, another leading light of the AGW movement.
If you were really journalists, you'd know this and you'd ask your guest about it - it's all been on the web for the last 10 days, after all. But instead you chose to serve the CBC's own pro-AGW agenda and to hell with the facts.
You should read this: http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/012796.html. Forget that it's a partisan conservative blog for just one second and think about what you're doing, as dino-media people. You're going to have to start being truthful soon, or your industry will die.
