Diary

The Phil Jones Dilemma: A Proof

[1] Either Climategate is true, or Climategate is false. This premise must be true because it is a tautology.

[2] Assume Climategate is true. We can assume anything is true and see what that implies.  This is called a conditional proof.  Don’t worry – we’ll do a conditional proof for “Assume Climategate is false” as well.

[3] If Climategate is true, then the hockey stick graph is a fraud, the CRU destroyed evidence that did not support their position in order to avoid Freedom Of Information requests, the CRU attempted to discredit scientists who disagreed with them, and Phil Jones is not a credible climatologist. Owch.  So sorry, Church of Climatology.  On to the second CP…

[4] Assume Climategate is false. Hey, maybe we really did misunderstand the scientific lingo.  Maybe there was a lot of cherry-picking.  I wasn’t there, so I don’t know for sure.  Let’s just see where this leads.

[5] If Climategate is false, Phil Jones is a credible climatologist. If this whole thing was a “vast right-wing conspiracy,” Phil Jones has no blood on his hands.

[6] If Phil Jones is a credible climatologist, then we must take him seriously when he states that no statistically significant warming has occurred since 1995, the Medieval period was warmer than the present, and there is no scientific consensus on global warming. Straight from the horse’s mouth, folks.

[7] Either [3] or [6] must be true. We established this in [1].

[8] From 7, 3 and 6, we get: the hockey stick graph is a fraud, the CRU destroyed evidence that did not support their position in order to avoid Freedom Of Information requests, the CRU attempted to discredit scientists who disagreed with them, and Phil Jones is not a credible climatologist OR no statistically significant warming has occurred since 1995, the Medieval period was warmer than the present, and there is no scientific consensus on global warming.

So we don’t need to bicker with the MSM about Climategate.  Let the Climatology Apologists explain it away if they want; that just restores Phil Jones’ credibility, which enhances the force of his recent, damning statements about climate “science.”  Either way you slice it, Climatology is a toast.