After the 2010 elections in the USA, headlines proclaimed, “
new Republican majority, let the investigations begin,” and “ href="http://www.mmail.com.my/content/59595-new-republican-majority-congress-promises-tough-ride-obama">New
Republican majority Congress promises a tough ride for Obama.”
One of the big targets for investigations: href="http://www.thegwpf.org/science-news/2508-a-climate-skeptic-with-a-bully-pulpit-in-virginia-finds-an-ear-in-congress.html">climate
“There’s a huge appetite among the rank-and-file to raise
fundamental questions about the underlying science,” said Michael
McKenna, a Republican strategist and energy lobbyist.
Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the environment
committee, pressed for investigations into “ href="https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy">Climategate.”
Never mind that the whole thing already has been href="http://live.psu.edu/story/47378">investigated style="font-style: italic;"
So one of the investigations has ended. The conclusion: “
inquiry finds no evidence that ‘climategate’ scientists misused data.”
“None of the investigations have found any evidence to question the
ethics of our scientists or raise doubts about NOAA’s understanding of
climate change science,” said href="http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2007/20071204_glackin.html">Mary
Glackin, the agency’s deputy undersecretary for operations,
according to the href="https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/25/science/earth/25noaa.html?_r=3">New
Note that Dr. Glackin was appointed to her position, at the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, by the Bush administration.