© Unknown
The so-called 'Independent Climate Change Email Inquiry' is unraveling faster than the man made global warming myth itself.

Within just a few days of its launch, this travesty has already been exposed as a sham. At least three of the five original panel members were found to be in cahoots with the warmist lobby on a rudderless ship skippered by hapless former University of Glasgow principal, Sir Muir Russell.

At the time of publishing this article two of the original crew members have jumped ship - last Thursday it was Dr Philip Campbell, this weekend rumour has it Professor Geoffrey Boulton. Who else will bail out?

An increasingly skeptic British press have quickly assailed the high moral ground to cast their eyes upon what may soon become the wreck of Sir Russell's review.

The demise of Professor Boulton was instigated after an article appeared in Friday's The Scotsman, a respected national newspaper that broadsided Boulton for signing a petition to show his great confidence that global warming was caused by human-caused carbon dioxide emissions.

But it gets worse because for 18 years Boulton worked at the University of East Anglia (UEA). In an article for Edinburgh University, Boulton fatefully wrote:
"The argument regarding climate change is over."
James Delingpole in Friday's Telegraph exposed what is fast turning into an almighty public relations shambles.

The respected climate commentator advises us we need look no further than the Inquiry's own website to witness the lies upon which this whitewash job has been built:

The Muir Russell FAQ states:
"Do any of the Review team members have a predetermined view on climate change and climate science?

No. Members of the research team come from a variety of scientific backgrounds. They were selected on the basis they have no prejudicial interest in climate change and climate science and for the contribution they can make to the issues the Review is looking at."
As famed Canadian climate analyst, Steve McIntyre, the unpaid blogger who precipitated the Climategate scandal by his Freedom of Information requests, points out:
"There are thousands of people in the world who are qualified to serve on this inquiry who have never met Jones, Briffa and/or Mitchell; who haven't worked for 18 years at the University of East Anglia and who aren't currently active in climate change policy advocacy - people who meet Muir Russell's criteria of having "no prejudicial interest in climate change and climate science"
Thus, we may infer from the Inquiry's Great Lie that there will be no truth or objectivity here for British taxpayers. It's plain to see now that these woeful whitewashers are handpicked lackies of a discredited and rotten British Labour Government hard set to be scuttled in the upcoming spring general election.

But the sharks of scuttlebutt will now earnestly start circling their third target, David Eyton, who is BP's group vice president of Research & Technology. Eyton is on record as being very much on board the warmist fleet while BP has been shamelessly funding the law-breaking University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit for several years. Eyton is reported to have said:
"The challenge of climate change requires policy development at all levels: global, national and local. Our work with Princeton is an example of BP's commitment to collaborative research, and has already provided a vital contribution to the pace of policy development. We trust that governments will be successful in reaching a consensus for significant action, and we are working to inform their actions based on our experience of low-carbon technologies and businesses."
Yet again, these are hardly the words of an impartial judge. By the Inquiry's own criteria the VP of a multi-billion dollar 'big oil' company investing heavily in 'low-carbon' technology and dependent on government subsidies, cannot qualify as a panel member who has no "predetermined view on climate change and climate science."

Why must we be continually treated to so much flotsam and jetsam? The captain is navigating the wrong course and the ship's passengers - the British people - are about ready to mutiny.

Pointedly, opinion polls in all English-speaking nations show the masses ebbing away from the man made global warming junket. The tide has turned against politicians who sail with that global warming ill wind.

Christopher Pearson puts it most eloquently in the Australian:
"What we are witnessing, in defiance of officialdom, government propaganda and the bulk of funded researchers in the field, is the collapse of a scientific paradigm. This is something that has never happened before. Politically speaking, it's a game-changer with the potential to overturn the normative assumptions commentators rely on."
Just like the former British Chancellor of Exchequer, Lord Lawson, said, we too condemn the decision that this rag-tag review be held in private. In light of the above, that will not do.

John O'Sullivan is a legal advocate and writer who for several years has litigated in government corruption and conspiracy cases in both the US and Britain. Visit his website. He offers his services free to the site and is not a site employee. Any opinions he expresses are his own and do not necessarily represent those of the site owner.