Jan
Penn State Protects Michael “Climategate” Mann
Circle the wagons, Penn State.
That’s the take from today’s article at Onward State regarding the Penn State University investigation of Michael Mann. And we have to agree.
As regular readers know, last week an ex-CIA agent went after Mann by telling his associates they could receive millions of dollars in Whistleblower rewards if they have anything on him. While it’s reported he’s not exactly a likable fellow around campus, still, the university must protect their own.
As Onward State tells it:
What makes the investigation more interesting is that, according to University Policy the outcome of the committee’s deliberations may be kept confidential. Like many Universities around the country, probes into faculty misconduct are protected, “to the maximum extent possible.” Additionally, many people are outraged that no one from outside Penn State is being asked to review the situation. Since this is the case, is it conceivable that Penn State is trying to save face to ensure that research dollars keep rolling in?
And who is on the committee?
The committee, which will be investigating the situation for 120 days, includes Henry Foley (Vice President for Research), William Brune (Mann’s boss in the Meteorology Department) and Candice Yekel (Director of the Office of Research Protections). If found guilty, Mann will have 14 days to respond.
Oh, and there are five other “tenured professors” that will be called upon. Nice. Hardball!
I wonder if any of these eight are either a) liberals and b) believe in man made global warming… Just sayin’.
Your tax dollars at work.
What a joke. This has to STOP.
Stealing people’s money in order to concoct fraudulent ways to tax them further is nothing less than SLAVERY BY OTHER MEANS.
It is probable that Mans peers knew what the political situation was with “climate change”and may have overlooked the truth bending ,Penn state was onto a good thing but where was the scientific code,somewhat beneath the pirates code.
“I wonder if any of these eight are either a) liberals and b) believe in man made global warming… Just sayin’.”
I think that you mean “Mann made global warming.”
Ha ha! Brilliant!
They haven’t read this perhaps, or have they?
‘AGW? I refute it THUS!’: Central England Temperatures 1659 to 2009 (Telegraph)
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100022226/agw-i-refute-it-thus-central-england-temperatures-1659-to-2009/
The foxes are guarding the henhouse again.
The only way a prof can get in real trouble at PSU is by violating Diversity Standards. If Mann had said something like Larry Summers’s accurate observation about women disliking math and science, he’d be kicked to the curb without appeal. Or if he had been on the unfashionable side of climate change, he’d have to answer serious questions. But since Mann has been firmly on the fashionable side, he’ll be just fine.
Climategate Forecast… IN 2006
“• What is the current scientific consensus on the conclusions reached by Drs. Mann, Bradley and Hughes? [Referring to the hockey stick propagated in UN IPCC 2001 by Michael Mann.]
Ans: Based on the literature we have reviewed, there is no overarching consensus on MBH98/99. As analyzed in our social network, there is a tightly knit group of individuals who passionately believe in their thesis. However, our perception is that this group has a self-reinforcing feedback mechanism and, moreover, the work has been sufficiently politicized that they can hardly reassess their public positions without losing credibility.”
AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT ON THE ‘HOCKEY STICK’ GLOBAL CLIMATE RECONSTRUCTION, also known as The Wegman report was authored by Edward J. Wegman, George Mason University, David W. Scott, Rice University, and Yasmin H. Said, The Johns Hopkins University with the contributions of John T. Rigsby, III, Naval Surface Warfare Center, and Denise M. Reeves, MITRE Corporation.