Geoffrey Boulton has tricked the hapless Muir Russell again. Only a few days ago, Muir Russell assured us:

The Team will operate as openly and transparently as possible.

Russell said that the Team members were “selected” on the basis that they had “no prejudicial interest in climate change and climate science”

Do any of the Review team members have a predetermined view on climate change and climate science? No. Members of the research team come from a variety of scientific backgrounds. They were selected on the basis they have no prejudicial interest in climate change and climate science and for the contribution they can make to the issues the Review is looking at.

According to the BBC here, Muir Russell repeated this in a statement last week:

Sir Muir issued a statement last week claiming that the inquiry members, who are investigating leaked e-mails from the University of East Anglia, did not have a “predetermined view on climate change and climate science”.

The Inquiry gave specific assurance that Boulton did not have specific expertise in the “climate change field itself”:

Professor Geoffrey Boulton has expertise in fields related to climate change and is therefore aware of the scientific approach, through not in the climate change field itself.

In today’s bombshell (h/t Bishop Hill), Boulton said, in effect, that he had tricked poor Muir Russell. While Russell may have intended to “select” Team members on “the basis they have no prejudicial interest in climate change and climate science”, Boulton had a different idea.

Throwing down a gauntlet against Muir Russell, Boulton said that, regardless of what Russell thinks, Boulton’s opinion is that the “committee needs someone like me who is close to the field of climate change”. Boulton told The Times:

“I may be rapped over the knuckles by Sir Muir for saying this, but I think that statement needs to be clarified. I think the committee needs someone like me who is close to the field of climate change and it would be quite amazing if that person didn’t have a view on one side or the other.”

Previously, Boulton had sandbagged Russell in respect to his past connections to the University of East Anglia – still unreported at the Inquiry website – see here. The Inquiry had stated:

None have any links to the Climatic Research Unit, or the United Nations’ Independent Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). More information about each of the review team members can be found in the Biographies section.

Although Boulton’s Inquiry biography does not mention it, Boulton was employed at the University of East Anglia for 18 years, 10 years overlapping with Phil Jones. When confronted, Boulton said that he had had “no professional contact with the University of East Anglia or the Climatic Research Unit”. But as recently as Oct 29, 2009, the Royal Society of Edinburgh (Boulton is the General Secretary) presented a program entitled “The impact of climate change on Scotland”, with presenters including Boulton himself, John Mitchell of the Met Office (and FOI fame) and an invited presenter from the University of East Anglia, Andrew Dlugolecki, described here as being a Visiting Fellow at the Climatic Research Unit itself; a similar title is ascribed to Dlugolecki in an apparently current bio here.

Dlugolecki is a participant in a Royal Society of Edinburgh Inquiry “Facing up to climate change” see here . This pdf is dated Jan 26, 2010 and Dlugolecki’s affiliation with the troubled UEA Climatic Research Unit was not mentioned by the Royal Society of Edinburgh.



