Yes m'lord contrition is a good sign, but forgive me, you seem unconvinced.

A good point m'lord, his original claim was “Phil Jones, EAU/CRU states under oath during UK parliamentary hearings 2010 states “There has been no statistically significant global warming since 1995”" so he does indeed use the word 'states' twice in the one sentence. I had not picked that up. It would clearly speak to intent as you say.

One moment m'lord, I will retrieve it from the transcript. Ah here we are, Mr Spindoc during his apology says; “He recanted on the BBC and not as I stated “under oath during the UK’s parliamentary hearings” I apologize to you and to OLOers for this attribution error but his statement remains a matter of record.”

If you permit me a brief moment m'lord I will check the transcript of the BBC interview.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8511670.stm

You are perfectly correct m'lord, the statement claimed by the defendant to be there simply isn't. Well yes m'lord, obviously the position forwarded by the defendant that Mr Jones' “statement remains a matter of record” is of course false.

Perfectly understandable that you should be upset m'lord, if a defendant were to verbal someone whilst apologising for the very same crime in my court I would want to take some form of action. However I submit that the defendant may well be confused by the turn of events and I'm sure if given a chance will rectify the matter.

Would an apology for his very first transgression would also assist in tempering your mood m'lord?

Yes indeed m'lord, we can all live in hope.

o sung wu,

Here is a pie chart:

http://www.desmogblog.com/2012/11/15/why-climate-deniers-have-no-credibility-science-one-pie-chart

Between 1 January, 1991 and 9 November, 2007 - 13,950 peer-reviewed articles on climate change - of those, 24 reject global warming.

(of course, the latest fad is to question the validity of peer-review, even though that system has delivered us sound science up till now)

<< There are quite a few posters around here who dismiss the expertise of those who are trained and qualified in their various disciplines....>>

And on that theme, we have fortuitously just received a leaked AGW believers training camp vid.

In it you will see four experts instilling in the new recruit the importance of respecting expert consensus. A skill which will stand him in good stead when he has to interpret *climate scientist* pronouncements like this:
BBC Interviewer: “ Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming?”
Phil Jones: “Yes, but only just…”

Anyway, here is that vid (the four experts are actually, CSteele, Poirot[in disguise with the beard] Qanda & Warmair)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=iRh5qy09nNw

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Phil-Jones-says-no-global-warming-since-1995.htm

Spin it guys....all you've got is spinnnnnnnn

Bugsy,

How about "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest"?

Lord Monckton's gone off again.

http://joannenova.com.au/2013/02/monckton-accuses-tony-press-uni-tasmania-of-fraud-and-deception/#more-27277

Word :)