Just so you know, it should be "US Media Couldn't Care Less".

The way it's worded means that they actually give a darn.  As we know, that's not in their interest.  Just thought I'd help ya out.

Thank goodness for third parties, in more ways than one.(as in proof readers and other news outlets outside the US)

Tom,

The blunder at GISS has turned out to be even bigger that the Telegraph states here. After the mistake was almost immediately recognized by bloggers, chief Hansen apologist and Newsbuster hater Gavin Schmidt added to the embarrassment by trying to downplay the significance of the error and launching into personal attacks on his opponents. If this wasn't bad enough, Schmidt admitted that GISS only has 0.25FTE checking data quality control and complained that their budget was woefully inadequate. All this despite the fact that Schmidt spends countless hours running his and Hansen's policy advocacy on his realclimate website (which incidentally is against NASA rules). A couple of days later, Schmidt then announced the problem had been fixed only to discover a 2nd time that there was still errors in the data. Even more egg on his and GISS's face. Bottom line is GISS credibility, already at a low level, now sinks even lower to underneath a snakes belly.

Lowest Sunspot activity in nearly 100 years

A
whole month passed without a sunspot being seen. This is the first time
since 1913 that such an event has happened. Data on sunspots has been
collected since 1749. The sun undergoes cycles every 11 years where
sunspot activity is close to zero.

Many climatologists
believe that solar magnetic activity contributes to climate changes on
Earth. Astronomer William Livingston, co-wrote a paper in 2005 that
predicted that sunspots would completely disappear within a 10 year
period.

Over the past 1000 years, three similar events
have taken place. The Dalton, Maunder, and Spörer Minimums. These
events let to rapid cooling with one even being dubbed a “Mini Ice Age”.

 
heres a detailed talk 1of 4

First Mutt's Viet Nam 2

IranianUranium

Another reason I wasn't crazy about McCain. He buys in to the whole global warming idiocy.

The concept of global cooling is now gaining ground in the UK and these papers are trying to hedge their bets as to what side is right. Writers and editors are being split pretty much down the middle, so they'll post more articles about stuff like this whereas the Messiah has ordained we will stop global warming.

Wouldn't mind some global cooling here in Southern California, its 80 + and dry and its the middle of November! 

I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous. And God granted it - Voltaire

I suspect much of the MSM used AGW hype to beat up those "evil" conservatives who refuse to bow down to UN wisdom and president Al Gore (he won in their minds). Now that their messiah is elected, they don't have a use for this boogeyman. So it is possible that the MSM will start questioning the "science" because they need to make their man look like he is improving the economy and he can't do that and attack plant food at the same time. So they will take it off his back. So much like they wouldn't question Obama until he was safe, they may now question AGW now that it is safe to do so. Too soon to know for sure. It is sad that our MSM needs to feel safe in order to do their job. The brits seem a lot more brave and operate with a more noble purpose than what we call journalists over here in the main stream circles. If AGW was promoted by Dan Quayle and the solution involved capitalism, it would have been debunked years ago. But since it is Al Gore and “carbon credits” we need to be bent over a prius and take it until we can prove we were raped beyond any and all doubt.

I have been following through climateaudit and realclimate... Actually, it was readers of Anthony Watts blog that first reported the errors, not climateaudit (doesn't really matter who reported the errors, though).  I still fail to see any evidence of a "cover-up".  The "mysterious" Canadian hotspot was explained at realclimate:

"the eagle eyed among you will notice that more data has been added to
the GISTEMP maps in between the original posting and the new corrected
posting. This is because different weather services post the data at
different times and it takes time for them all to do so. Roughly half
the data takes more than two weeks to come in. However, between last
friday (when GISTEMP downloaded the first GHCN data) and today
(thursday), stations in Australia and northern Canada were reported." 

Take it for what it is worth... it seems like a viable explanation to me.

 
to call for independent review of the Goddard data.  The Congressional Budget Office has the people with the numbers and QA background to do it right.  Make him bring all of his data forth and to publish his models as they have largely been paid for by the US Governnment.  The whole push for CO2 caps in the US is based on the data from this group

 If, as is claimed here, he has been lying about or even not examining data, then it is time for either Hansen or the whole Goddard Institute to go.  The latter may be necessary, for the lack of "whistle-blowers" in the Institute shows that they are mostly on board with this whole approach of Hansen's. Of course, when either happens, the cry will be of "conservative censorship", not that his institute was either too careless or too committed to a cause to examine the truth.

"What experience and history teach is
this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history,
or acted on principles deduced from it."

G. W. F. Hegel