This is becoming a farce

The IPCC AR4 is fast becoming swiss cheese with the large number of holes being drilled in it. Never before have the warmists come under such scrutiny.

The latest non-peer reviewed extract is actually from an article in the NY Times.

I found this reference to the New York Times in WGII 14.4.6. Just thought it should be part of the growing record:

The reference reads (Wilgoren and Roane, 1999) and is the source for the following claim:

Unreliable electric power, as in minority neighbourhoods during the New York heatwave of 1999, can amplify concerns about health and environmental justice.

The AR4 reference page can be found here:

It reads:

Wilgoren, J. and K.R. Roane, 1999: Cold Showers, Rotting Food, the Lights, Then Dancing. New York Times, A1. July 8, 1999

That article can be found here:

I?m not sure who peer reviewed it.

The adherents of teh Climate Change religion now have so many paragraphs from the vaunted report that are just plain wrong or unscientific they can no longer claim that robust peer reviewed science is the basis of the report. They can’t just dismiss them as a few errors. Barefoot or sandal wearing tossers like Lynne the guy with the girls name at the Standard are actually the deniers now. Their religion is in tatters.

Now even the ultra-pinko Guardian has found flaws and hidden data. Now the pinkos have found lies the race is on amongst the media to utterly destroy the liars.

Phil Jones, the beleaguered British climate scientist at the centre of the leaked emails controversy, is facing fresh claims that he sought to hide problems in key temperature data on which some of his work was based.

A Guardian investigation of thousands of emails and documents apparently hacked from the University of East Anglia’s climatic research unit has found evidence that a series of measurements from Chinese weather stations were seriously flawed and that documents relating to them could not be produced.

This finally links the emails leaked by a loyal citizen to expose the corruption and an actual verified issue. This confirms the emails are real.

Today the Guardian reveals how Jones withheld the information requested under freedom of information laws. Subsequently a senior colleague told him he feared that Jones’s collaborator, Wei-?Chyung Wang of the University at Albany, had “screwed up”.

The revelations on the inadequacies of the 1990 paper do not undermine the case that humans are causing climate change, and other studies have produced similar findings. But they do call into question the probity of some climate change science.

The apparent attempts to cover up problems with temperature data from the Chinese weather stations provide the first link between the email scandal and the UN’s embattled climate science body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as a paper based on the measurements was used to bolster IPCC statements about rapid global warming in recent decades.

And stil nick “Quota” Smith keeps his job. When this all explodes in the warmists faces there are going to be tears for sure.