Hey look, Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann is busy revising historical observations with a computer program, again. This time it’s as one of several authors of a paper to be published in Nature magazine claiming that Antarctica is, suddenly, not cooling as we had been observing all along but, per Mann, “warming at the same rate as the rest of the planet.” Which, er, isn’t just now.

They’ll get to that soon, no doubt. In the meantime, remember, cooling is not evidence that the warming has slowed (and the recession is not evidence that the economic growth has slowed, either, remember that, Winston).

But really, thank goodness for these algorithms, man, er, Mann, allowing the continuing struggle against all manner of troubling issues such as Antarctic cooling and the obvious corruption from placement of surface measuring stations–in fact, it is fair to say, from obviously corrupt placement, given how evidence continues to pile up over at Watts Up With That of instruments re-sited to impermissible locations since the embarrassing August 2007 exposures by Team Watts began (more on that in a moment).

So, first Mann et al. “got rid of” a thousand years of accumulated knowledge, in the anticipatory phrase of one IPCC lead author, and now find Antarctic warming. Soon, we’ll hear just how warm these past few winters have really been, as we would’ve noticed had we had an alarmist nearby with his handy Miracle Algorithm Temperature Hyper-recaster.

Thank goodness we see how science being . . . somewhere other than in its rightful place . . . during the Bush years hasn’t impeded the steady flow of grant money to help answer troubling, er, questions about observations which muddy the alarmists’ case (like a pesky Antarctica not warming except, by coincidence, around the chain of heat-venting sub-sea islands called the Seal Nunataks). On the other hand, I do see that science being in its wrongful place has made it simply out of the question to support inquiry into blazing red flags announced by the alarmists’ own supporting case–such as the bizarre efforts by the custodians of the U.S. data set to adjust raw temperature data, purportedly in the name of removing the (upward) urban warming bias mind you, yet managing somehow to make half of those adjustments upward, in a way that upon the slightest scrutiny is unsupportable. Yes. Science is truly in need of a reformation.

As Joanne Nova has pointed out in devastating fashion, it’s not us who have the burden of proof, now, is it? That falls to those who are demanding the money and power. So, maybe some of those billions going toward restoring science to its rightful place–which it seems, involves an addiction to making failed doomsday predictions–could be directed not to addressing (and revising) the series of inconvenient observations blocking the alarmist industry’s path, but to openly confronting the questions they beg with their very own evidence.