The second of three reviews into hacked climate e-mails from the University of East Anglia (UEA) is set to be released later.
It has examined scientific papers published over 20 years by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the heart of the e-mail controversy.
In fairness, the BBC has reported the issues people have with Lord Oxburgh's interests. But still, notice how Harrabin reports how the mails were "hacked" - were they? I thought that hadn't been confirmed yet...
However, if the panel follows the recent House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report into the e-mails it will conclude that the scientists involved had no intention to deceive.
Odds that they'll follow the Committee report?
Odds that once this review is over, we'll be told again "the science is now decided"?
Update: Well, what a fucking surprise.