<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"><channel xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"><title>PJ Media</title><link>https://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2009/12/05/climategate-obama-and-the-great-scientist-gamble/feed/</link><description>PJ Media is a leading news site covering culture, politics, faith, homeland security, and more. Our reporters and columnists provide original, in-depth analysis from a variety of perspectives.</description><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 07:16:01 -0400</lastBuildDate><item><title>Climategate: Obama and the great scientist gamble</title><description>&lt;![CDATA[Since Lionel and I opened our big mouths about Gore and Oscar the other day, I have been doing a fair amount of media &amp;#8211; most friendly and some unfriendly. On the unfriendly (or suspicious) side the favorite argument seems to be that the majority of scientists say AGW is a serious danger &amp;#8211; therefore it must be.  Of course we don&amp;#8217;t know that that&amp;#8217;s really true and, even if it is, what we have been reading in the Climategate emails makes their motivations for such opinions more than a tad suspect.  A cursory review of history reminds us that majority rule is a silly approach to science, in any case.  If it were so, we would still be assuming the world was flat.]]&gt;</description><pubDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2009 05:38:59 -0500</pubDate><creator xmlns="dc">&lt;![CDATA[Roger L. Simon]]&gt;</creator><enclosure url="" type="image/jpeg" length="123" /><link>https://pjmedia.com/roger-l-simon/2009/12/05/climategate-obama-and-the-great-scientist-gamble-n217626</link></item></channel></rss>