A tipping point for the warmists...

...may have arrived. The blogosphere is in full arousal mode over the latest exposure of climate change data fraud. The sleuth who has "driven a coach and four" as one commentator puts it, through one of the major planks of AGW (the use of tree ring analysis to determine a historical temperature record) is Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit...another blogger writes...

...let’s do a little thought experiment. Suppose you are an AGW advocate who for some reason believes we need to limit our CO2 and economies at all costs, you know in your heart that this is the right course of action. Additionally you fully believe we are heading toward certain doom by heating the earth a few degrees C. Suppose again, you are a good mathematician and you understand the problems with statistical analysis and know how to work around them. Now you are also an expert in the types and styles of proxies available in the field and have a small network of like-minded friends to work with... remember this is hypothetical not accusatory.
Suppose further, that as an expert you are of course aware of the incredibly limited usefulness of trees as thermometers but also aware that trees are known to grow faster in warmer temperatures at times. It cannot be denied. Therefore, wouldn’t it be perfectly reasonable to make papers which reach the correct conclusions using this data (link and below) in the face of all of these known problems? If the conclusions are justified for the good of humanity, aren’t you doing a good and just thing even though the result is probably not accurate?

...and from Tilo at Jennifer Marohasy.com...This means that we either have to conclude that the surface temperature record is wrong, or that the tree ring reconstructions are wrong. If the tree ring reconstructions are wrong, then it is impossible to make the statement that the current climate is in any way unusual. If the surface temperature record is wrong, then the 20th century rise is either not there or it is greatly exaggerated...

...precisely...as leading catastrophist Dr Stephen Schneider observed way back in October 1989... "Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective,and being honest."

...and from the comments...I wish I could find an innocent reason for what CA has reported. Steve McIntyre’s analysis is devastating in its simplicity and wholly fatal to the last 15 years of work by Briffa, Mann and their many co-authors. They who who have hid behind a wall of pride and activism are now exposed.It may however be too late to stop the AGW juggernaut before the economies of the developed world are shackled by the environmental fascists and their leftist political brothers.
I grieve for science and the human species if they succeed...

...and what does it all mean ? Quite simply this expose is likely to destroy the so-called scientific consensus over global warming/climate change. Scientists who have been wavering warmists must now conclude that the science can't be settled if it is built on shonky foundations. I expect more defections towards AGW scepticism...even Dr Strangelove had a conscience...