It's the temperature, stupid

Pachauri will be made to go for the greater good of the global warming cause. As much blame as possible will be heaped on him. He will be painted as a dillettanté, with his silly novel used as evidence. And we will be told the IPCC can now move forward without him.

Just as we are told glaciergate and amazongate don't damage the core case for manmade global warming climate change, so we will be told Pachauri's departure won't damage the work of the IPCC.

So sceptics mustn't concentrate too much fire on Pachauri. Amazongate's in the bag. So is glaciergate. And indeed mountaingate. But the Milibands can say it's only collateral damage, the core case isn't affected.

Of course the extent of CO2's role in any warming is - to put it kindly - unproven. But you can't deliver a simple knock out blow to this theory that can be explained in two simple paragraphs.

The key questions now are: has it been warming at all? And if so, has it been exceptional?

Temperatures are now the key. If it hasn't been warming, global warming climate change is finished. Of course this is where climategate comes in. It looks murky, and why labour to hide something unless you have something to hide?

All the temperature datasets look highly questionable. Keep explaining problems with the temperature data in ways that the lay public can understand. Goodness knows there are enough. One problem at a time. Get one problem into the public consciousness and then move on to the next one.

Make the notion of problems with temperature data familiar. So familiar that people start to shake their heads when they read of a new one.

In politics "it's the economy, stupid". And in AGW, it's the temperatures.