headshot91 said:
The report of the independent Science Assessment Panel was published on 14 April 2010 and concluded that the panel had seen "no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit." It found that the CRU's work had been "carried out with integrity" and had used "fair and satisfactory" methods.
Also while admitedly scientific data can be manipulated, in the vast majority it is unbiased fact. |
Lmao and you do understand that the head of the so called propagated "independant research" was headed by Lord Oxburgh who has direct ties with carbon trading companies as well as being the chairman for alternative energy companies, who would benefit from having the review state there was no evidence. Thats why no one took the review seriously :)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7071751.ece
This is why we can't always trust scientific data because it can be manipulated instead of being non-biased
" Rebellion Against Tyrants Is Obedience To God"







