When you have nothing left with which to argue, please avoid the smear…

There's an awful lot to read, and one's heart sinks as you peruse it. What comes out of it, to me, is that real loss that science and research are suffering as a consequence of forgetting that science is about scepticism, not consensus.

And to conclude, if you aren't aware that Dr Rajendra K. Pachauri, the head of the IPCC for the last 13 years, and a member of India's Climate Council, has resigned from both positions, and is helping the Indian police with their enquiries, so to speak, about unwanted sexual behaviour towards his female staff - why would you expect the ABC or the major newspapers to deal with anything so trivial?

In his resignation statement Pachauri said, among other things, 'For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.'

Isn't that the major problem?

['dharma' means many things, but Pachauri might have meant by it 'the right way of living'.]

[* Istvan's essay is followed by several hundred comments, including several that do criticise the Monckton et al paper, from various perspectives, which shows that Climate etc is serving as an immediate form of peer review. Monckton has written a response to much of the critique - and all within a couple of days.]