PDA

View Full Version : Mann, Nobel-Winning Climate Scientist, Cleared of Wrongdoing



The Night Owl
07-02-2010, 12:08 PM
July 1, 2010 4:39 PM
Mann, Nobel-Winning Climate Scientist, Cleared of Wrongdoing

Posted by Charles Cooper

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. Another Penn State University review has unanimously cleared a leading climate scientist of a research misconduct allegation stemming from leaked e-mails about global warming.

The report said professor Michael Mann did not seriously deviate from accepted academic practices for proposing, conducting or reporting research.

The university inquiry in February dismissed three related allegations and recommended further investigation on a fourth. A five-member panel of professors dismissed that allegation outright in the report Thursday.

...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20009478-501465.html

The only thing left to do is watch Ken Cuccinelli's fishing expedition go down in flames in August. Suck it, deniers.

FlaGator
07-02-2010, 12:35 PM
Bwahahahahahahahahahahah!

Constitutionally Speaking
07-02-2010, 04:00 PM
-------- By fellow believers in his fairy tail religion at his university.

Articulate_Ape
07-02-2010, 04:14 PM
Let's see what were the possible outcomes here?

1) The review board of a university that receives and will receive untold millions from the AGW ponzi scheme can condemn a guy that helped get the whole thing started and make both the AGW gravy train and their institution look really, really bad; thus losing the money and their reputation all at once.

OR

2) Clear Mann and keep the money flowing and cover their collective asses.


Hmm, tough choice.

Lager
07-02-2010, 05:28 PM
Suck it, deniers.

Wow, a disagreement in a scientific debate reduced to playground showboating. You know, I don't know why Lincoln didn't resort to that phrase in his famous meetings with Douglas. Would have saved him a lot of time. I'm beginning to like this global warm up and I believe we don't emphasize the positives enough. :)

The Night Owl
07-02-2010, 05:42 PM
Wow, a disagreement in a scientific debate reduced to playground showboating. You know, I don't know why Lincoln didn't resort to that phrase in his famous meetings with Douglas. Would have saved him a lot of time. I'm beginning to like this global warm up and I believe we don't emphasize the positives enough. :)

We're talking about a man being cleared of false accusations.

Articulate_Ape
07-02-2010, 05:49 PM
We're talking about a man being cleared of false accusations.

Yeah, and OJ was cleared by a jury of his peers once too.

Sonnabend
07-02-2010, 07:50 PM
We're talking about a man being cleared of false accusations.

By sycophants and fellow believers.

Nubs
07-02-2010, 08:04 PM
Again you make an illogical conclusion, Mann may have been cleared of wrong doing but it in no way proves his hypothesis to be true.

nightflight
07-02-2010, 10:08 PM
Wow, an academic circle-jerk cleared him. Probably a similar bunch that recently announced that Barry O is one of our greatest presidents.

SarasotaRepub
07-03-2010, 12:35 PM
By sycophants and fellow believers.

Yep.:rolleyes:

lacarnut
07-03-2010, 06:42 PM
We're talking about a man being cleared of false accusations.

We are talking about a proven liar; even if money was no object, the outcome would have been the same. The University could not disgrace their own Nobel winning climate scientist as a fraud any more than he has already been disgraced.

You really have to fucked up in the head to believe this kangaroo board's decision was anything but tainted.

Sonnabend
07-04-2010, 03:32 AM
You really have to fucked up in the head to believe this kangaroo board's decision was anything but tainted

http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy63/Ardra_01/motivator99c9a6d0a5e6c626038dd7167c.jpg

The Night Owl
07-07-2010, 04:54 PM
We are talking about a proven liar; even if money was no object, the outcome would have been the same. The University could not disgrace their own Nobel winning climate scientist as a fraud any more than he has already been disgraced.

You really have to fucked up in the head to believe this kangaroo board's decision was anything but tainted.

Well, you still have Mr. Cuccinelli's fishing expedition to hang your hopes on. Just don't get your hopes too high.

Sonnabend
07-08-2010, 05:19 AM
Well, you still have Mr. Cuccinelli's fishing expedition to hang your hopes on. Just don't get your hopes too high.

Tim Flannery, climate alarmist

"It could be a THOUSAND YEARS" :rolleyes:

His words.

MrsSmith
07-08-2010, 06:09 PM
British Panel Clears Scientists
By JUSTIN GILLIS
Published: July 7, 2010

A British panel on Wednesday exonerated the scientists caught up in the controversy known as Climategate of charges that they had manipulated their research to support preconceived ideas about global warming.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/08/science/earth/08climate.html?_r=1

Unfortunately, the "panel" was made up of:


* Geoffrey Boulton is a Scottish climatologist whose field of study actually appears to be the science of chairing committees — he chairs or is a member of thirteen committees, councils, or royal societies. Oh, and “[h]e leads the Global Change Research Group in the University of Edinburgh, the largest major research group in the University’s School of Geosciences.” But surely he wouldn’t allow his deep professional commitment to global climate change research to bias his findings.
* Professor Peter Clarke is a physics professor whose CV includes nothing to do with climate change; but I’m sure he has considered himself a quiet expert in the field, ever since he first read the original report from the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
* David Eyton is an engineer with British Petroleum, the Group Head of Research and Technology (R&T). He, too, appears to have no background in climate change research. BP, of course, like every other oil company, is very heavily invested in climate change and expects that some form of carbon-trading commodities market will prove to be a glory hole for the entire industry. Though certainly, Mr. Eyton would never allow himself to be influenced by such crass commercial concerns.
* Finally, we have the Jack of All Trades, Professor Jim Norton. He is — well, I suppose I’d better just let Professor Norton tell his own tale (I presume he wrote his own CV):

Aged fifty-seven, Jim Norton is an independent director and policy adviser. He is an external member of the Board of the UK Parliament’s Office of Science & Technology (POST) and council member of the Parliamentary IT Committee (PITCOM). Jim is a Non-Executive Director of F&C Capital & Income Investment Trust plc, where he chairs the Audit & Management Engagement Committee. He is a Board Member and Trustee of the Foundation for Information Policy Research (FIPR), as well as a member of the ‘Electronic Communications Expert Advisory Panel’ for the Irish Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg). Jim chairs the Steering Group for the Secure Software Development Partnership (SSDP) of the Technology Strategy Board.

He was a founder member of the Cabinet Office Performance & Innovation Unit in 1999, a former Chief Executive of the DTI Radiocommunications Agency (the UK’s radio spectrum manager 1993-1998) and has held senior positions in Cable & Wireless (Marketing Director C&W Europe 1990-1993), Butler-Cox (Director Vendor Consulting Practice 1987-1990), and British Telecom (Senior Manager International Business Development).

Jim is a Visiting Professor of Electronic Engineering at Sheffield University and an Honorary Doctor of Engineering of that University. He is an External Examiner for the IoD Certificate in Company Direction’. Jim is a Chartered IT Professional and Fellow of the British Computer Society (BCS), where he is chair of the ‘Professionalism Board’ and is a Vice President and Trustee. He is a Chartered Engineer, Fellow of the Institution of Engineering & Technology (IET) and is Chairman of the IET IT Sector Panel. He is also a Fellow of the Royal Society for the Encouragement of the Arts, Commerce and Manufactures and of the Institute of Directors. Jim holds the Diploma in Company Direction from the Institute of Directors and is a Chartered Director.

I can’t imagine how Professor Norton forgot to add “devilishly handsome, dashing, and terminally narcissistic.” In any event, his expertise in climate change should be clear: He is obviously an expert in everything, like the professor in Giligan’s Island.


http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/07/07/wonderful-news-on-climate-change/

But I'm sure those clearing Mann actually understood the "science" and were unbiased. Really.


:D:D:D

Oh, I just LOVED this quote:


The issue involved an effort to reconstruct the climate history of the past several thousand years using indirect indicators like the size of tree rings and the growth rate of corals. The C.R.U. researchers, leaders in that type of work, were trying in 1999 to produce a long-term temperature chart that could be used in a United Nations publication.

But they were dogged by a problem: Since around 1960, for mysterious reasons, trees have stopped responding to temperature increases in the same way they apparently did in previous centuries. If plotted on a chart, tree rings from 1960 forward appear to show declining temperatures, something that scientists know from thermometer readings is not accurate.


Now, there is NO way the scientists could be wrong about any of it. Obviously, every tree in the world just started acting differently. Of course.

The Night Owl
07-09-2010, 09:22 AM
Ken Cuccinelli Makes Basic Factual Errors About Mike Mann's Research, Stolen Emails in Response to UVA

On June 11, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli formally responded (pdf) to the University of Virginia's request that he drop his demand for documents related to climate scientist Michael Mann's research. The response is riddled with inaccuracies, according to an analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), and undermines his case for obtaining documents pertaining to Mann's work at the school.

Cuccinelli's response acknowledges the existence of investigations that have cleared Mann and other scientists of misconduct charges stemming from emails stolen from a British university last year, claiming those investigations "speak for themselves." But Cuccinelli's response repeats misleading claims to justify his subpoena, despite the fact that the investigations he referenced debunked the claims he is making. Furthermore, he gets basic facts wrong about the content of the emails.

Cuccinelli's response contains three misrepresentations of the stolen emails, two of which have been discredited by previous investigations.

...

http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/ken-cuccinelli-uvs-respose-mann-0417.html

Sonnabend
07-09-2010, 09:41 AM
From: Phil Jones
To: santer1@XXXX
Subject: Re: A quick question
Date: Wed Dec 10 10:14:10 2008
Ben,
Haven’t got a reply from the FOI person here at UEA. So I’m not entirely confident the numbers are correct. One way of checking would be to look on CA, but I’m not doing that. I did get an email from the FOI person here early yesterday to tell me I shouldn’t be deleting emails - unless this was ‘normal’ deleting to keep emails manageable! McIntyre hasn’t paid his £10, so nothing looks likely to happen re his Data Protection Act email.
Anyway requests have been of three types - observational data, paleo data and who made IPCC changes and why. Keith has got all the latter - and there have been at least 4. We made Susan aware of these - all came from David Holland. According to the FOI Commissioner’s Office, IPCC is an international organization, so is above any national FOI. Even if UEA holds anything about IPCC, we are not obliged to pass it on, unless it has anything to do with our core business - and it doesn’t! I’m sounding like Sir Humphrey here!



From: Phil Jones To: mann@xxx.edu
Subject: Fwd: CCNet: PRESSURE GROWING ON CONTROVERSIAL RESEARCHER TO DISCLOSE SECRET DATA
Date: Mon Feb 21 16:28:32 2005
Cc: “raymond s. bradley” , “Malcolm Hughes” Mike, Ray and Malcolm,
The skeptics seem to be building up a head of steam here ! Maybe we can use this to our advantage to get the series updated !
Odd idea to update the proxies with satellite estimates of the lower troposphere rather than surface data !. Odder still that they don’t realise that Moberg et al used the Jones and Moberg updated series !
Francis Zwiers is till onside. He said that PC1s produce hockey sticks. He stressed that the late 20th century is the warmest of the millennium, but Regaldo didn’t bother
with that. Also ignored Francis’ comment about all the other series looking similar to MBH.
The IPCC comes in for a lot of stick. Leave it to you to delete as appropriate !
Cheers
Phil
PS I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data.
Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act !


Jones admitted he wrote them.

DU+NU_Reject
07-21-2010, 07:50 AM
Wow, a disagreement in a scientific debate reduced to playground showboating. You know, I don't know why Lincoln didn't resort to that phrase in his famous meetings with Douglas. Would have saved him a lot of time. I'm beginning to like this global warm up and I believe we don't emphasize the positives enough. :)

You act as if this is a big surprise! :D

DU+NU_Reject
07-21-2010, 07:55 AM
By sycophants and fellow believers.

Quit injecting reason into this, you!

__________________________________________________ _______________________________________
TNO's generic assertions and chest-thumping is an insult to fellow Atheists/Antitheists like me. My main gripe with atheism has always been the apparent monopoly Political Left (and socialism in particular) has on atheism.