Why am I not surprised by this story?

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/politics/holyrood-fiasco-peer-s-40k-for-chairing-climategate-review-1.1052947?localLinksEnabled=false

Holyrood fiasco peer’s £40k for chairing Climategate review

A former civil servant criticised for his role in the Holyrood Parliament building fiasco has pocketed £40,000 for chairing an inquiry into the recent climate change row.

Sir Muir Russell walked away with nearly £6000 a month for leading a probe which cleared scientists at the University of East Anglia of data manipulation.

[snip]

Hacked e-mails written by university staff led to fears that information on climate change was being manipulated, a row that was played out internationally.

The six-month probe concluded with Russell and his team noting the “rigour and honesty” of the scientists.

A freedom of information request has revealed that the university paid Russell a £40,000 fee for his chairmanship.

He also benefited from £2908 in travel and £976 for accommodation.

The Review website notes that the team met on 15 occasions, which works out as the equivalent of Russell receiving £2666 per meeting.

John Wilson, an SNP MSP in Central Scotland, said: “It is difficult to accept that Muir Russell should have received £40,000 for an inquiry conducted by East Anglia university.

“On top of pension payments and an early-retirement package, he is now making more money ultimately at the expense of the public purse.”

cont.

Chinese Unwittingly Reducing Carbon Consumption - China Traffic Jam of Coal Lorries (Sky News)

More than 10,000 lorries, mainly carrying coal, are stuck in the northeastern Chinese region of Inner Mongolia, according to officials.
The motorway going towards China's capital and the neighbouring province of Hebei are now more like a car park than a major road, state TV reported.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/China-Thousands-Of-Lorries-Caught-Up-In-Miles-Long-Traffic-Jam-On-Motorway-Toward-Beijing/Article/201009115711529?lpos=World_News_Second_Home_Page_Article_Teaser_Region_2&lid=ARTICLE_15711529_China%3A_Thousands_Of_Lorries_Caught_Up_In_Miles-Long_Traffic_Jam_On_Motorway_Toward_Beijing

From Cameron Rose yesterday: "Does anyone know where Paul Hudson of BBC Look North has gone since 21st July which is when his last post was published?"

Call off the search. He's back:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/2010/09/a-very-average-british-summer.shtml

I came across the website Numberwatch.

It has a page of laws which includes the Law of Computer Models:

The results from computer models tend towards the desires and expectations of the modellers.
Corollary
The larger the model, the closer the convergence.

Does anyone know where Paul Hudson of BBC Look North has gone since 21st July which is when his last post was published?

I don't recall Lomborg being a sceptic, though it's a while since I read his original book. His thesis, as far as I remember, was that the precipitous response to the warming was economially unsound, and that adaptation was by far the better course. Has he changed musch from that view?

Your Grace,
Is there enough meat in the Guardian story re: Lomborg's new book, being hailed as a turnaround by MAJOR skeptic at the Huffington Post?

I must be extremely bored or I wouldn't be adding this absolutely stupid, wrong, alarmist - call it what you may - link from the Washington Post.

Is it silly season? Or is this some lame attempt to divert from the IAC report?

The article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/30/AR2010083003947.html?hpid=artslot

Increased carbon in atmosphere may explain bumper crop of poison ivy

Are there any plans to release the HSI in Kindle format or are there previously voiced objections?

In the last week I have written to Chris Huhne and to Prof Bob Watson accusing Watson of being a liar when he stated at the Guardian Debate that if you add CO2 to the atmosphere "it must warm".
At that same debate Watson said that he could not imagine a better system to advise on climate change than the IPCC. This weekend in the Telegraph he accuses the IPCC of atrocious handling of its mistakes. All that is now required is for him to admit (nudge nudge wink wink) that maybe they were not all mistakes :)