U.S. Government
International
Academic, Non-Governmental
WASHINGTON—As a scientist, Michael Mann has peered into his share of microscopes, but he never expected to have his life’s work magnified under one.
While delving into math and physics as an undergraduate at the University of California, Berkeley in the late 1980s and then geology and geophysics as a doctoral student at Yale University in the 1990s, he could hardly imagine the firestorm his “hockey stick” diagram would ignite among those who doubt that the burning fossil fuels are significantly altering the Earth’s climate.
That ordeal prepared him for the scrutiny that descended upon him as a result of the manufactured scandal called "Climategate," and for the latest investigation into his science, this time for taxpayer fraud of all things, by Virginia attorney general Ken Cuccinelli.
Smelling a politically motivated witch hunt, Greenpeace has stepped into the fray with its own investigation into the Attorney General and possible relationships with global warming deniers.
This kind of commotion has become all part of a day's work for Mann. Years of harassment and verbal pummeling have not been able to deter the Pennsylvania State University climatologist from persevering in the career he clearly cherishes.
“I’ve loved science from the time I was a young child,” the professor at Pennsylvania State University’s Department of Meteorology told SolveClimate in an interview. “I’m driven by a passion to understand Earth’s climate system. One aspect is human-caused climate change. Pursuing that has opened me up to the climate change denial industry.
“For me, the bottom line is that it’s a matter of principle,” he continued, his words now flowing. “To allow climate change deniers to be successful in scaring scientists away from the science of climate change is unconscionable. I’m the last person to want to give them that victory.”
Pause.
Then: “Or at least I like to think that’s the approach I’ve taken.”
Hundreds of his fellow scientists seem to think it is. They rallied around the research Mann contributed to the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change when the trumped up “Climategate” affair erupted last winter.
And they have come to his defense again now that Cuccinelli is in the midst of investigating him for violating the state Fraud Against Taxpayers Act. That’s connected to research he conducted while teaching at the University of Virginia between 1999 and 2005.
The environmental advocacy organization Greenpeace US is now doggedly pursuing a tangled paper trail which they hope will expose the inner workings of a well-connected network of naysayers attempting to discredit the work of certain climate scientists and to stop the Environmental Protection Agency from deploying the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases.
“We’ve been fighting off the climate change deniers for a very long time,” Greenpeace research director Kert Davies told SolveClimate. “These attacks distract people from the science of climate change. Part of what we’ve done for 20 years is to fend them off and educate people about climate change.”
Climategate Losing Traction?
On July 1, Penn State completed the second portion of a two-part investigation of Mann’s role in the “Climategate” e-mails. After two months of deliberation, the investigatory committee found him innocent of the remaining charge of scientific misconduct.
The committee found that “Mann did not engage in, nor did he participate in, directly or indirectly, any actions that seriously deviated from accepted practices within the academic community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research, or other scholarly activities.”
Back in February, the Penn State committee also found him innocent of misconduct, finding no evidence that he falsified data, destroyed data related to the 2007 IPPC report or misused privileged or confidential information available to him in his capacity as a scholar.
“Climategate” burst onto the scene last November after hackers released thousands of e-mail exchanges and other climate data exchanged among researchers at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. Mann was embroiled in the controversy because his name appeared in the suspect e-mails.
...but a libertarian one. Their views on legalization of drugs and immigration are further to the left than the Democratic Party, so calling them a conservative think-tank is incorrect.
Great coverage on a great story. Congratulations to Michael Mann for standing tall, to Greenpeace for going after this transparently politically motivated witch hunt by Cuccinelli, and to the Union of Concerned Scientists for pushing back on the campaign of lies. We all owe tremendous gratitude, in fact, to the thousands of scientists who have persevered through decades in researching and reporting on the often "inconvenient truth" of the global climate crisis.
I'm reading "Merchants of Doubt" now, a chilling story of how denialists, funded by special interests, embraced by the right wing, and abetted by a credulous mainstream media, have been fighting a vicious rear guard action against science and against the necessary environmental and public health regulations that are called for by the science.
(see also http://climatechange.foreignpolicyblogs.com/tag/denialists/ from me on the science and the campaigns against it)
I suspect Mann, he of the hockey stick (which shows a temperature reconstruction, and not CO2 levels as stated in the article), has perhaps been swept up by political forces beyond his ken, and certainly beyond his control.
The birth, and the life so far, of the IPCC has been a conspiracy designed to use CO2 as a stick with which to beat the most industrialised countries of the world. The ego-trip attractions of saving the planet at the same time as winning huge research grants and much publicity were too much for a small group of climatologists, including Schneider, Hansen, Santer, Houghton, the folks at CRU, and not really many more at the heart of it all on the science side - perhaps 60 or so in all.
With the very successful PR of the IPCC, and Summary Reports decoupled in key ways from the main IPCC report inputs, the CO2 wheeze took off dramatically over 20 years of so, at the end of the 20th century. It is collapsing now, but not before doing a great deal of damage not only to the standing of science, but also to economies, and to the mental wellbeing of countless children and the more vulnerable adults scared almost witless by the scaremongering.
Now in this view, Mann has merely been a 'useful idiot', to borrow a phrase from Lenin. His culpability may therefore be seen as limited.
This global warming scam is won't die even their science is backed up by Voodoo prediction and computer projection.
Once you started a lie, you have to continue lying.
ClimateGate is a disgrace to human kind.
Thanks, Mann, for absolutely nothing but 100 billion of tax payers' dollars wasted.
Mann was both an undegraduate AND Master's student at Berzerkeley?
Case closed.
That place produces NOTHING but political radicals.
Great coverage on a great story. Congratulations to Michael Mann for standing tall, to Greenpeace for going after this transparently politically motivated witch hunt by Cuccinelli, and to the Union of Concerned Scientists for pushing back on the campaign of lies. We all owe tremendous gratitude, in fact, to the thousands of scientists who have persevered through decades in researching and reporting on the often "inconvenient truth" of the global climate crisis.
I'm reading "Merchants of Doubt" now, a chilling story of how denialists, funded by special interests, embraced by the right wing, and abetted by a credulous mainstream media, have been fighting a vicious rear guard action against science and against the necessary environmental and public health regulations that are called for by the science.
(see also http://climatechange.foreignpolicyblogs.com/tag/denialists/ from me on the science and the campaigns against it)
...but a libertarian one. Their views on legalization of drugs and immigration are further to the left than the Democratic Party, so calling them a conservative think-tank is incorrect.
Much like the operations of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG Enron, Bernie Madoff the WMDs this is is a crisis of integrity. This is a question of whether climate scientists can clean their own house, which appears to be a big negative.
Many of us are perfectly happy with science climate studies that produce data supporting global warming, but we want them performed in a scientific manner. These climate scientists are engaging in activities that should constitute scientific misconduct.
Everyday people can understand or suspect highly that conspiracy in confidential peer review undermines the value of published science. Perhaps only complete fabrication is more egregious than conspiracy in peer review.
Unfortunately the only way the taxpayers will be able to control the unscientific con artists is to cut the funding. This is the damage done by eco-egotistical scientists.
Green peace should stay away from defending scientists that are arguably involved in scientific misconduct, that is what many in the public are deriving from their analysis of activities of the climate scientists and their money grubbing universities (the universities take half the grant money).
Do not worry. When the scientists with a lack of integrity are removed, the scientists with integrity will be there.
NEWS: "there has been a consistent pattern of failing to display the proper degree of openness", notable over complying with Freedom of Information (FoI) requests."
Hey, failing to display the proper degree of openness is typically in sync with HAVING SOMETHING TO HIDE like cooked books or data. Who spearheaded the major investigation of the CRU? AlGore the Carbon Hore (aka "The Poodle")?
Oh, and its' so fun to see scientific morphology at work. g l o b a l w a r m i n g takes on tarnish as it's scrutinized so all media shifts to c l i m a t e c h a n g e. Too funny!
It is clear to those who have actually been following the science of climate change that the entire Climategate affair has been a piling-on by those interested in using any excuse to discredit the science. As could have been predicted from the beginning, the resulting conclusions of several investigations by now:
- Under harassment, scientists behave like human beings: They get snappy and irritable, and make nasty jokes; and
- The science they produce is still good science.
But in the meantime, the highly-placed deniers have used their positions to persecute these scientists for sticking up for their science, instead of knuckling under to the interests of short-sighted oil companies.
So it's very good that the tables are turned on the persecutors, who should be forced to justify their unwarranted attacks on the careers and credibility of people that dedicate their lives to finding things out. Just as civil liberties need protection from over-zealous law enforcement, real science needs protection from harassment by those who are only trying to protect vested interests.