So, your reponse is to offer a clip from a Steve McIntyre page?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_McIntyre
One that doesn't seem to be saying what you think it's saying.
What do you think this page is saying?
You do realize don't you that investigative panels are by definition not qualified to "investigate" the science? They are qualified to investogate the ethics, but not the science. The science is investigated by scientists.
(And, all the investigations found no evidence of ethical violations directly involving the CRU datasets, btw. the "ethical" violations they did find all involved minor matters, like passing around a rude cartoon of Sen Inhofe, improperly discussing other scientists data before publication, and possibly a few cases of scientists using funds for purposes they did not reveal in their grant applications.)
Is that what you want, to take science out of the hands of scientists and get some government or academic agency to "declare" the science true or false?
Dude, that's fucking insane. What happens when the politicians change and teh next group comes along and DECLARES the science be some other way?
So, you take a page from an unqualified critic, that says that he thinks taht some other critics amendment complaining that the science wasn't investigated, only the ethics, should have been put in the report rather than what the comittee as a whle decided to publish, and you think this means what exactly?