This is the second investigation to clear climate scientists of wrongdoing. If only as much effort were taken to find the hacker and his sponsors *cough*ClimateAudit*cough* we could discover something really interesting.
There was no scientific malpractice at the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, which was at the centre of the "Climategate" affair.
This is according to an independent panel chaired by Lord Oxburgh, which was convened to examine the research published by the unit.
It began its review after e-mails from CRU scientists were published online.
The panel said it might be helpful if researchers worked more closely with professional statisticians.
This would ensure the best methods were used when analysing the complex and often "messy" data on climate, the report said.
"We cannot help remarking that it is very surprising that research in an area that depends so heavily on statistical methods has not been carried out in close collaboration with professional statisticians," the panel remarked in its conclusions.
The e-mails issue came to light in November last year, when hundreds of messages between CRU scientists and their peers around the world were posted on the world wide web, along with other documents.
Critics said that the e-mail exchanges revealed an attempt by the researchers involved to manipulate data.
But a recent House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report into the e-mails concluded that the scientists involved had no intention to deceive.
And Lord Oxburgh said that he hoped these further "resounding affirmations" of the unit's scientific practice would put those suspicions to bed.
He stated: "We found absolutely no evidence of any impropriety whatsoever. That doesn't mean that we agreed with all of their conclusions, but scientists people were doing their jobs honestly." …