The Collapse of UN Climate Science and Politics

The UN climate politics is now collapsing in front of our eyes inside the Bella Conference Center of the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit, while the snowstorm and activist demonstrations rage outside. The collapse was triggered by Climategate showing the UN Climate Panel IPCC is based on scientific fraud.

The collapseY will not change global politics, but science in general and climate science in particular is hit by a strong blow. IPCC will be dismantled and the big governmental institutions behind IPCC must be reorganized; it is inconceivable that Phil Jones resumes his position.

Scientific academies and societies, including in particular the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, have to back off from their support of IPCC and regain credibility by resurrecting scientific standards with a clear distinction between science and politics.

It will be very interesting to follow the emergence of a new FEniCS rising from the ashes... 

It seems unlikely that Obama will get on Air Force One to Copenhagen, since he has nothing to deliver and nothing to gain. 

The witness by Patrick J. Michaels, formerly professor of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia (1980-2007) and now senior fellow at the Cato Institute, should be listened to by the Royal Swedish Academy in particular:

• Few people understand the real significance of Climategate...But there's something much, much worse going on—a silencing of climate scientists, akin to filtering what goes in the bible, that will have consequences for public policy, including the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) recent categorization of carbon dioxide as a "pollutant.
• "The bible I'm referring to, of course, is the refereed scientific literature. It's our canon, and it's all we have really had to go on in climate science (until the Internet has so rudely interrupted). When scientists make putative compendia of that literature, such as is done by the U.N. climate change panel every six years, the writers assume that the
peer-reviewed literature is a true and unbiased sample of the state of climate science.
• That can no longer be the case. The alliance of scientists at East Anglia, Penn State and the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research (in Boulder, Colo.) has done its best to bias it.

Three leading climatologists in the Royal Swedish Academy have signed a letter to UN contradicting the official statement by the Royal Academy in support of IPCC and scientific consensus on AGW. This is the same filtering of scientists not believing in the bible as described by Michaels. This is very damaging to the very core of science.