November 24, 2009 12:33 pm ET
Under the headline "Global Warming's Waterloo?," The Fox Nation linked to a November 23 Gateway Pundit post asserting that "Senator James Inhofe [R-OK] will call for an investigation into the Climate Research Unit (CRU) emails that showed that global warming scientists were deliberately mainpulating [sic] and hiding information from the public to further their cause." But Gateway Pundit's claim that the emails -- which were reportedly stolen by a hacker -- "showed that global warming scientists were deliberately mainpulating [sic] and hiding information," and consequently Fox Nation's headline suggesting that these emails represent a "Waterloo" for climate change, are false; in fact, numerous climate change experts have explained that such a characterization is predicated on reading the emails out of context and distorting their scientific language.
From The Fox Nation accessed November 23:

From the November 23 Gateway Pundit post to which the Fox Nation headline links, the text of which was also provided in part by Fox Nation:
Senator James Inhofe will call for an investigation into the Climate Research Unit (CRU) emails that showed that global warming scientists were deliberately mainpulating [sic] and hiding information from the public to further their cause.
In using the reportedly stolen emails, critics have misrepresented numerous passages to advance the dubious claim that the emails undermine the evidence of anthropogenic global warming. In fact, Wired's Threat Level blog reported on November 20 that Gavin Schmidt, a climate scientist at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said: "There's nothing in the e-mails that shows that global warming is a hoax," adding, "It's just scientists talking about science, and they're talking relatively openly as people in private e-mails generally are freer with their thoughts than they would be in a public forum. The few quotes that are being pulled out [are out] of context. People are using language used in science and interpreting it in a completely different way." Moreover, RealClimate.org's staff has refuted the distortion of an email that has been repeatedly cited by critics to claim that the emails undermine global warming science, noting that the terms "trick" and "hide the decline" that appeared in a 1999 email represent an "example" of "instances of cherry-picked and poorly-worded 'gotcha' phrases [being] pulled out of context." RealClimate.org explained that "[s]cientists often use the term 'trick' to refer to a 'a good way to deal with a problem', rather than something that is 'secret', and so there is nothing problematic in this at all," and noted that "hiding the decline" refers to a method that is "completely appropriate."
&mdash M.W.
Copyright © 2012 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved.