Climate emails review panellist quits after his impartiality questioned

Nature editor Philip Campbell forced out of independent panel after saying there was nothing to suggest a cover up by scientists at the University of East Anglia
The Guardian
Feb. 16, 2010

'The scientists have not hidden the data. If you look at the emails there are one or two that are jargon' - Philip Campbell.

A member of an independent panel to investigate claims that climate scientists covered up flawed data on global warming has been forced to resign after sceptics questioned his impartiality.

Philip Campbell, editor in chief of Nature, stepped down from the panel yesterday, just hours after its official launch, after an interview emerged in which he said there was nothing to suggest a cover-up by climate scientists at the University of East Anglia.

Resigning, Campbell said: "I made the remarks in good faith, on the basis of media reports of the leaks. As I have made clear subsequently, I support the need for a full review of the facts behind the leaked emails. There must be nothing that calls into question the ability of the independent review to complete this task, and therefore I have decided to withdraw from the team."

Sir Muir Russell, the chairman of the inquiry, said: "I regret the loss of his expertise, but I respect his decision."

In an interview last year with Chinese state radio, Campbell said: "The scientists have not hidden the data. If you look at the emails, there is one or two bits of language that are jargon used between professionals that suggest something to outsiders that is wrong. In fact, the only problem there has been is on some official restrictions on their ability to disseminate data, otherwise they have behaved as researchers should."

The interview, posted on the Bishop Hill blog run by the climate sceptic Andrew Montford and shown on Channel 4 News, risked undermining Muir's claim that the inquiry team was impartial.

A press statement about the panel members said: "They were selected on the basis that they have no prejudicial interest in climate change and climate science, and for the contribution they can make to the issues of the review."

The inquiry was set up and paid for by the university after allegations that the emails, released in November, showed scientists had manipulated data, censored critics and failed to comply with requests to share their data with critics.

Campbell was invited to sit on the panel because of his expertise in the peer review process as editor of one of the world's most renowned science journals. Nature has published some of the most significant papers on climate change research, including those supporting the "hockey stick" graph of historical temperatures condemned by climate sceptics.

The review is one of a handful into the affair, dubbed "climategate" by some commentators, which has focused attention on climate science andprovoked calls for resignations.

Separately, the university yesterday said it had asked the Royal Society, Britain's premier scientific academy, to help reappraise the unit's scientific conclusions.

Trevor Davies, pro-vice chancellor of the university, said: "The process and findings of our researchers have been the subject of significant debate in recent months. Colleagues in Climate Research Unit have strenuously defended their conduct and the published work, and we believe it is in the interests of all concerned that there should be an additional assessment considering the science itself."