Climategate: Michael Mann’s very unhappy New Year

As I said yesterday, one of our jobs this year is to wipe the complacent smiles off the smug faces of the lobbyists, “experts”, “scientists”, politicians and activists pushing AGW.

This is why I am so glad to report that Michael Mann – creator of the incredible Hockey Stick curve and one of the scientists most heavily implicated in the Climategate scandal – is about to get a very nasty shock. When he turns up to work on Monday, he’ll find that all 27 of his colleagues at the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University have received a rather tempting email inviting them to blow the whistle on anyone they know who may have been fraudulently misusing federal grant funds for climate research.

Under US law, regardless of whether or not a prosecution results, the whistleblower stands to make very large sums of money: it is based on a percentage of the total  government funds  which have been misused, in this case perhaps as much as $50 million. (Hat tip: John O’Sullivan of the wonderful new campaigning site www.climategate.com)

Here’s that email in full:

Hi,

Greetings and best wishes for a prosperous New Year.

National Search
After the recent whistleblower revelations of emails between climate researchers and data from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, there are on-going investigations into potential fraudulent use of grant funds in Climate Research in the US.  I am assisting interested parties who may have details of fraud in climate research to make contact with the proper authorities, and to share in the rewards paid when the funds are recovered.

Whistleblower Rewards Program
The federal government has established vigorous programs to identify and prosecute fraudulent grant applications and administration.  The US Department of Justice (DOJ) administers the False Claims Act.  It allows rewards for those who come forward with details of grant fraud to share in the recovery of federal funds.  This reward can be as much as 30% of the total amount reclaimed.  The program is almost completely reliant on insiders to report their knowledge of the fraud in their institutions.

Attorney Literally “Wrote the Book” on Fraud Recovery Lawsuits
Joel Hesch, Esq., of Hesch and Associates, literally wrote the book on how to report federal fraud.  He has an extensive background in representing whistleblowers in all types of federal funding fraud cases, including Educational/ Research Grant Fraud.  According to Mr Hesch: “Many institutions receive grants, whether for research or educational purposes. When they lie to get the grant or keep the grant or if they use the funds for purposes outside the grant, they are liable under the DOJ program. There have been many grant cases brought by whistleblowers. ”

If you know of anyone who might have details about fraudulent statements or actions by recipients of federal grant funds for climate research, please have them contact me immediately at the below email or cell phone.  Alternatively, they may also contact Mr Hersch directly,  and let him know that they were referred by me.  All communications are completely confidential.  They may want to consider using a third party email service (Yahoo, Hotmail, or other) instead of work email to communicate.

30% of $50 million is more than $12 million.  Ask your friends to do the right thing, and be rewarded for doing it.
Our country, and in fact, the entire world is counting on someone to stand up and tell the truth about climate research. The effects of moving forward with taxes and policies based on fraudulent science could potentially cripple the US economy and cost lives and jobs for generations.

Look forward to hearing from you.

All the best

Kent Clizbe

Happy New Year, Climategaters.

Read original story here with comments.

192 thoughts on “Climategate: Michael Mann’s very unhappy New Year

  1. Lovely thought, but the money’s gone. And the only reward is based on what recoverable. Which is nothing.

  2. It would be nice to see some of the Climategaters under oath in a court being grilled by a skilled cross exaiminer.

  3. That crew isn’t paranoid enough? I can’t say I can consider this a positive step. If someone comes forward, that’s one thing –trolling for them in a public (and publicized) manner like this is something else.

  4. The parents participating in the Baloon boy travesty are well under way in paying with their prison time. Mann is months from confrontation. Is Mann collecting donations for his legal defense?

  5. This must be a larger version of the “Secret Witness” program.
    Ask not for whom the Bus rolls, it rolls for thee.

  6. Sadly it will more than likely just be used by the usual suspects as proof that powerful corporate interests are trying to persecute the good doctor Mann.

    I

  7. The worm is really starting to turn in the UK press. James Delingpole and Simon Heffer have joined Christopher Booker (all from the Daily/Sunday Telegraph) in bloody the nose of the Warm Mongers. The Daily Express hopped over to the sceptic side last year in a big way – reflecting opinion of the readership rather than leading it.

    And today we get this mother of all announcements from the BBC trust

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1241049/BBC-announces-review-science-coverage-month-revealed-ignored-Climategate-leaked-emails.html

    This is probably due to the thousands of letter the Trust has received from sceptics in recent months and is the best news since the Climategate e-mails were released.

    These are happy days indeed.

  8. Well I haven’t read the article yet; but my first reaction; though fully supportive of misconduct whistle blowers; I don’t hold much stock in the idea of bribing colleagues to rat on a fellow worker.

    Hey if you believe it is misconduct, rat all you like; and the sooner the betetr.

    But if you are a REAL scientist, shouldn’t you want to report the truth; even if it isn’t going to net you a brass razoo for doing so.

    Not speaking up without being bribed, is to me almost as bad as being one of the unindicted co-conspirators.

    Well maybe I’m just funny that way.

    On a related issue, I just stumbled across a letter to Physics Today, for May 2009 from Wolfgang Knorr at the University of Bristol; that seems somehow like a name we are familiar with.
    He professes to be a climate reasearcher, and he thinks nano-technology and climate science are sort of parallel universes. Well he didn’t use those words; but you get the idea, so he referecnes Michael Crichton’s fictional account of nano-tech gone wild.
    But more to the subject at hand, Knorr refers to a TV demonstration of CO2 “greenhouse effect as demonstrated by one Pieter Tans from NOAA’s Earth Systems Laboratory. Seems we have heard of this phony demonstration before.

    The question I would ask Wolfgang Knorr, would be, if he has ever thought of (being a lcimate researcher) repeating Pieter Tans’ TV expose, but substituting pure H2O instead of pure CO2, and see what sort of GHG effect he3 can observe; or in that instance sans CO2, would he expect to see only a FEEDBACK effect, but no GREENHOUSE effect.

    Get back to us on that Wolfgang, after you have done the experiment.

    But to your point as to whether there is a debate about the existance of a CO2 greenhouse effect. Yes I actually know some real people who profess that vociferously; the absence of any such thing that is.

    But I don’t know a single soul who is a serious skeptic about anthropogenicmanmade global warming, and the coming anthropogenicmanmade computer model prediction of catastrophe; who doesn’t accept that CO2 is a so-called greenhouse gas, and that it does intercept some surface emitted LWIR radiation, and thereby increases the local atmospheric temperature a bit. So I don’t see a cult of denial about that, despite your assertions. But a lot of people do believe that the rest of the climate system beside CO2 does come to the rescue, to prevent the remotest possibility of the catastrophe, which you so fervently believe in.

    Knorr asserts (in the letter) “In the case of the greenhouse effect, people are wary of the complicated climate models that only a few experts understand.”

    Well whoop de do, Wolfgang, and where do you place yourself; in the elite panel of experts; who received the stone tablets on the mountain; or are you too among us incognoscenti ?

    Talk about a self serving promotional exercise; Wolfy, you are almost as pompous as your very famous ancient namesake; at least his real talents are seldom under dispute.

    But as to Dr Mann’s new year; I’m all for open investigation, to see if there is real fire behind the smoke; but let’s not make it a who wants to be a millionair farce.

  9. I doubt that many of Mann’s co-workers will even consider the money because they are usually people hand-picked by Mann for their loyalty – its how the academic greasy pole works.

    The potential whistleblower will know that they will probably never work in climate science again. The evidence for deliberate misconduct has got to be compelling prima facae evidence or the whistleblower will find it very uncomfortable in a court to defend him/herself.

    Mann is a past master at making claims of fossil-fuel conspiracies of everyone who dares oppose him and his acolytes will agree with him.

    More importantly, the current administration and Democratic majority Congress is unlikely to do much to prosecute. If the mid-terms turn the Congress sharply Republican then things might get a lot dicier but at the moment Mann is safe IMHO

  10. I have heard from some one inside the Penn State shop that he expects that no one will turn States evidence. Collegiality.

    The person did mention that Pennsylvania politicians are drawing a LOT of heat (heh) because of ClimateGate. The word IS getting out.

  11. I’m not too fond of this approach. The distasteful aspects are all pretty obvious.

    Plus I don’t think it’s going to be very effective. The complete story of what Mann did (or did not do) is going to take a painstaking marshaling of complex evidence by someone who takes the time to understand the scientific issues. The real problem with the Penn State investigation is that this type of review is unlikely to happen. This is partly because the investigators lack subpoena power, partly because they lack the investigative and prosecutorial skill to conduct the case and (perhaps) because they will be reluctant to turn over too many rocks.

    Mann is obviously a very good academic politician. No crime there, but he is going to have the upper hand here.

  12. Huge federal whistleblower awards are not BS, “merely anecdotal”, or trivial.

    A friend in the Washington DC area who sometimes serves as an expert witness in these cases (fraud against the U.S. government) told me of two very recent awards of $15+ million and $35+ million to individual whistleblowers in DC Metro.

    Normal, everyday government workers who saw some funny business, documented it, and reported it.

  13. Re Jim Carson (14:10:02) :

    Lovely thought, but the money’s gone. And the only reward is based on what recoverable. Which is nothing.

    With a sharp lawyer(s), don’t count on that. Mann’s assets from book deals and PR work may be one option, larger option is to go after organisations that have profited from the fraud. This is where folks in the US perhaps have the advantage over us in the UK with your lawyers and class action system.

  14. How about something like this?

    From: “Mick Kelly”
    To: Nguyen Huu Ninh (cered@xxxxxxxxx.xxx)
    Subject: NOAA funding
    Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:17:15 +0000

    —-boundary-LibPST-iamunique-1131694944_-_-
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=”utf-8″

    Ninh
    NOAA want to give us more money for the El Nino work with IGCN.
    How much do we have left from the last budget? I reckon most has been spent but we need to show some left to cover the costs of the trip Roger didn’t make and also the fees/equipment/computer money we haven’t spent otherwise NOAA will be suspicious.
    Politically this money may have to go through Simon’s institute but there overhead rate is high so maybe not!
    Best wishes
    Mick

    These climategate fraudsters should have their personal finances audited as well.

  15. “We are turning up the heat in pursuit of prosecutions against scientists involved in the recent Climategate scandal. Our dedicated group of volunteers working with Climategate.com are behind a plan to entice co-workers of discredited Penn State University climatologist Michael Mann to turn whistleblowers in return for millions of dollars in federal reward money. Mann is famous for his emails obtained from the East Anglia University server hacking, and for creating the widely disputed ‘hockey stick’ graph that is depicted in Al Gore’s film, “An Inconvenient Truth.””

    MND
    Top fraud attorney seeks climategate Whistleblowers

    http://mensnewsdaily.com/sexandmetro/2010/01/06/top-fraud-attorney-seeks-climategate-whistleblowers/

  16. Happy New Year, Climategaters.

    Sets entirely the wrong tone to this email. I very much doubt it will have any effect.

  17. Ughhh!

    Witch hunts –
    Regardless of the political affiliations of the witches and the hunters –
    Are never very pleasant affairs.

  18. It’s a stupid email for all the reasons I see others have covered so well.

    This whole post is unworthy of this site.

  19. david (14:47:22) :

    You may be correct about Penn State, but not about the US Dept. of Justice.
    That’s Federal money what’s been allegedly misappropriated, and that’ll get plenty of longarm-of-the-law attention. There’s blood scent in the water, and they’re a’ coming to get some.
    Advantage DOJ: In times of grant $$$ being lean, the carrot is on the stick.
    That’s an offer that can’t be easily refused.
    Slicker & bigger fish than Michael Mann have found themselves on the wrong side of the law, and regretted it. Don’t look for big Pols to save him, they may be looking for bus fodder to save themselves.

  20. It is not going to, and is not designed to, work.

    It is fairly clear to me that this is a publicity stunt by the legal firm involved. Just look at the free advertising they are getting, and there will be lots more.

    That ‘eco’ website that reported evenly on climategate (in reply in another thread) is selling stuff as well. people are just cashing in on the new popularity. I’ve no objections as it is better than the only cashing in so far that has been from Gore and his ilk, and web sites ramping up the scare factor.

    Now how can I get my company name across so much of the web, and even into the MSM? Hmmmmm….

    Anyone got any good ideas?

  21. it is NOT based on the total fraud but on the total $ recovered

    and since most research is cost reimbursement based, the amount of $ recovered will likely be minimal

  22. If Mann is capable of creating a hockystick out of nothing he is more than capable of creating a senario where he will look like a whistleblower. Thereby ensuring funding for the next 5 years. He will be as slippery as a wet bar of soap covered in oil.

  23. I’m not too fond of this approach. The distasteful aspects are all pretty obvious.

    There are laws. And given probable cause I’d expect that a notification of the laws is in order. Esp. with voters breathing down the necks of the politicians.

  24. M. Simon (14:45:57) :

    I have heard from some one inside the Penn State shop that he expects that no one will turn States evidence. Collegiality.

    Yeah, but what about his former underlings at the U. of VA? Less collegiality there, mayhap.

  25. There is enough evidence without any insiders providing help. Paper trail. Obstruction of justice if evidence is destroyed. Any deals will probably be with people implicated.

  26. From the Daily Mail explosion:

    “In 2007 the then editor of Newsnight hit out at the BBC’s stance on climate change.

    Peter Barron said it was ‘not the corporation’s job to save the planet’. His comments were backed up by other senior news executives who feared the BBC was ‘leading’ the audience, rather than giving them ‘information’.

    Mr Barron had claimed the BBC had gone beyond its remit by planning an entire day of programmes dedicated to highlighting environmental fears.”

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1241049/BBC-announces-review-science-coverage-month-revealed-ignored-Climategate-leaked-emails.html#ixzz0bsV6RsEd

    The story is unhappy. Why do we NEED whistleblowers? Because a few people think they can roll over the little guy by “changing what the peer-review process is” (paraphrased.) On the other hand, one of the only ways to handle corruption is to make it pay. And thievery in the high halls of academia should be no more shielded than in Congress, the Executive suite or on a Military base. Just because they got fancy degrees does not mean they can lie, cheat and steal.

    A few $35M recovery awards and manipulators will get the message. You want to run your show like organized crime? You get treated like organized crime. And honesty gets rewarded in this world.

  27. He’s right, 30% of $50m is more than $12m…it is exactly $15m, how hard is that math to get right?

    Cheers

  28. The winter 2009 – 2010 cold stress death numbers will likely be a shock. Given the severe cold now in place. The numbers are likely larger when you factor in the numbers of carcasses too decomposed to establish cause of death and possible ‘hide the numbers’.

    FWC News – FWC releases preliminary 2009 manatee mortality data

    http://myfwc.com/NEWSROOM/10/statewide/News_10_X_ManateeDeaths09.htm

    The high number of manatees affected by cold stress during the winter months of 2008-2009 can, in part, explain the higher-than-average number of manatee deaths last year. Biologists documented a record high of 56 cold stress-related deaths in 2009, which was more than double the five-year average. Biologists also documented high numbers of watercraft-related and perinatal (newborn) deaths – the two most commonly documented causes of death in 2009.

    http://research.myfwc.com/features/view_article.asp?id=33589

    Statewide, 72 deaths from cold stress were reported during winter 2008-2009. This number is twice as high as the most recent five-winter average.
    (More than double)

  29. In many organisations if you do not verbally agree with AGW you will not get a job or contract work, and you won’t get a career. It is highly unlikely all researchers are so committed, even if they would never say it publicly. This would give them a chance to be free and cleanse their souls.

    Certainly there is at least one person at CRU who felt so moved and look what effect he/she is having. They may be nervous at being discovered and sacked but so far they have done well.

    I think I need to get a T-shirt printed : ‘Climate Modeller – Will Prove Anything For Money’

  30. In Eisenhower’s industrial complex speech, he also said

    “The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.”

    Is even more Federal whistle blower money the answer or is it time to slash Federal funding of university research to the bone?

    If the professors had to beg the private sector for funds, their activities might actually benefit humanity.

    Challenge: Can anyone name something of valuable that has come out of academic research?

  31. This is a silly and demeaning piece of legal ambulance chasing.
    The Federal statutes which apply were designed to winkle out fraud in goverment procurement. They share a substantial portion (typically 15%) of the recovery from overcharges with the whistle blower. Numerous lawsuits are in process in the defense industry initiated as a result of this.
    In this case, there is no procurement, so the aggrieved party would have to be the legislature that passed laws on the basis of bad information generated by a conspiracy.
    At best, the outcome might be that no sensible lawmaker listens to scientists in the future. More likely is that funding for scientists of all stripes will be curtailed, because the recommendations of some, endorsed by all the big names in the community were not just wrong, but visibly mistaken.

  32. Freezing cold and blizzard snows are practically shutting down the entire northern hemisphere. Money is now being lost due to diminished economic activity at a phenomenal rate. The money being spent and lost is supposed to be mitigated by accurate climate predictions. The wealthy elite are being hit hard by their own doing. They were largely responsible for promoting the Man-made global warming scam. Now they get to reap what they sowed. Accurate predictions of climate activity would have mitigated their loses and gotten the sheeple ready to deal with it. Too late now.

  33. “Anticlimactic (15:52:20) :
    […]
    I think I need to get a T-shirt printed : ‘Climate Modeller – Will Prove Anything For Money’”

    Make that ‘Climate Modeller – Will Prove Anything For Food’

  34. “Dennis (15:54:20) :
    […]
    Challenge: Can anyone name something of valuable that has come out of academic research?”

    MP3. DVB. That was easy.

  35. The whistleblower program is a way out for those that recognize wrong doing. Financial motivation is secondary. The climategate whistleblower is just the tip of an iceberg that’s getting bigger .

  36. Jeff in Ctown (Canada) (14:14:48) :
    >Probably will get tagged by the SPAM filter. Most of these guys will likley not even see this e-mail. Too bad, would be good to have some insider wistle blowers

    I’m sure they all read WUWT everyday. Even if they don’t, this thing is all over the web. So don’t worry. Anytime now, we’ll get a taker.

  37. Nice to see that the former CIA guy does not use the term “hacker” but instead goes directly for the whistle-blower that leaked the emails… refreshing!

    They should send the email to the IT guys instead.

    [ The I.T. guys will know… trust me… -mod]

  38. Take out a newspaper ad in the student newspaper. If they’ll let you. Billboard. I hate to suggest it, but, the young republicans will help.

  39. Maybe Michael Mann himself might be willing to act on the offer on the condition that he’d be offered full immunity (and money, of course). Now, that would be an extremely cool yet devastating blow to the warmist camp. Is there a credit organization who would be willing to front him some substantial money after examining his evidence and its potential payoff?

    Just dreaming, but one never knows.

  40. Dennis (15:54:20) : Challenge: Can anyone name something of valuable that has come out of academic research?

    Nuclear reactor. First one built under the bleachers at a university… (Imagine doing that today!)

  41. Dennis (15:54:20) :

    Challenge: Can anyone name something of valuable that has come out of academic research?

    Jonas Salk attended NYU Medical School and later at University of Pittsburg School of Medicine, developed the vaccine that ended polio with funding from the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis.

    Of course there is much that is positive coming from the university research system the world over. In this case we have a few bad, very bad eggs who have commandeered the process. They used strong arm, looter tactics to intimidate usually meek science types – a reason they were so successful. Combined with agit-prop activists (Move On) and a fawning media, they pursued an agenda they thought perfect.

    The mistake was that energy alternatives and sustainability needed doctored science to make it work. This is wrong. It corrupted the science and method, and caused rational people to roll their eyes. Then the whole campaign got usurped by the globalists who tried to leverage it into a world government agenda. At a cost to national economies of billions of dollars. Big money – big battles.

    Recovered funds? There are billions in the pipeline to study “climate change.” People who bring an end to that scam will cause contract cancellations and funds “recovered.” It is big money – do not doubt it. But the need for ending foreign oil imports remains. Alternative energy and clean domestic energy resources are valid and necessary for a strong economy and national security.

  42. If nothing else, it will make him sweat, and further sow the seeds of distrust and paranoia amongst the climategaters. The more nervous they get, the more apt they are to make mistakes, or turn on each other, or quit.

  43. I wouldn’t get your hopes up. Bureaucracies hate whistle blowers. It never turns out well for the person blowing the whistle.

    It would also take an impartial Justice department to prosecute. The Justice department is lead by the Attorney General who is appointed by the President. I doubt very much that this POTUS cares that much about truth, scientific or otherwise.

    After the November Congressional elections, maybe all kinds of illegal activities will get additional scrutiny. Time will tell.

  44. Michael (15:58:53) :

    If next winter follows this winter in lockstep, it will be late, but better late than never. Three cheers for the Great Whistleblower.
    Who was that masked man?

  45. Michael In Sydney (15:49:33) :

    “He’s right, 30% of $50m is more than $12m…it is exactly $15m, how hard is that math to get right?”

    It is ‘right’.
    15 – legal fees = 12.
    Easy

  46. Polar Brown Bear: A brown bear that adapted to sea-ice environment and, as a result, grew larger and more formidable than the brown bears it come from.
    And if there is no ice and it bears (Pun) it’s young on land, they turn brown.

  47. It really doesn’t matter (I think) whether the email sent to mad professor by proxy Mann’s (infamous now due to his emails leaked/obtained from the East Anglia University server and for his so called climate research) collegues, produces a result or not. What does matter is that an increasing number of people gets involved and it will put focus on this monumental hogwash and flush out the AGW crap

  48. tarpon, from a 2007 article :

    Polar Bears. Polar bears are not becoming endangered. A leading Canadian polar bear biologist wrote recently, “Climate change is having an effect on the west Hudson population of polar bears, but really, there is no need to panic. Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear (sic) to be affected at present.”

    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YmFiZDAyMWFhMGIxNTgwNGIyMjVkZjQ4OGFiZjFlNjc=

    The argument seems to be : Polar bears swim out to floating ice. If the floating ice is not there they will drown.

    The question is : WHY do polar bears swim out to floating ice? To catch seals. If there is less floating ice where do the seals go? To the shore, where the polar bears are!

  49. This seems insignificant, possibly unproductive, in itself. But remember, this is only one facet of a much larger situation. And there’s no statute of limitations for fraud.

  50. I am not overly familiar with the inner workings of a politically driven campus, got my BS and was done, but am a bit familiar with Fed LEO’s.
    Mann and co had better watch their cya and internal threats against any whistleblowers as the DoJ loves that type of behavior.
    It allows them to use not only the whistleblower protection laws, but also RICO statutes. Once they have shown that the RICO statutes are applicable; which a long term threat to others’ livelihood, unless they do (publish) what you want them to, does qualify as, Mann is toast.
    They will go through his entire history and suddenly the threats that were made to not give someone tenure, or to quash a publication all will be added to the piles of indictments. 200+ count indictments are not unheard of once the dogs are on the scent.
    This can happen even without a whistleblower, beyond the initial leaker, should Mann’s behavior put a dangerous context to a phrase in a 5 year old email.

  51. This could potentially have a huge impact on Penn State. Indirect costs vary by school, but average around 45%. Thus, for $50m, the school might have to repay $23m or so. Ouch.

  52. Michael In Sydney (15:49:33) :

    He’s right, 30% of $50m is more than $12m…it is exactly $15m, how hard is that math to get right?

    Clizbe’s math prowess is sure to give Mann cause for trepidation.

  53. DailyExpress
    Thursday January 7,2010
    By Martyn Brown
    FREEZE MAY LAST THREE MORE MONTHS

    “BRITAIN ground to an icy halt ­yesterday as heavy snow paralysed most of the country amid warnings that the big freeze could last until March.”

    “Jonathan Powell, of Positive Weather Solutions, warned that sub-zero temperatures would continue for some time, making this winter one of the coldest in 100 years.”

    He said: “Freezing temperatures could well stay with us until late February or even early March.”

    The Met Office said it would get colder with more snow forecast.

    A spokesman said: “Easterly winds will bring very cold air from Russia as the week goes on. There will be widespread snow again on Saturday night and Sunday.

    “Temperatures will get even lower and could get down to -8C (18F) in the South.”

    If these guys can be trusted, you decide, stock up on everything

  54. Some people are trying to say that people who would not tell without money are bad people. But one thing that the money may do, as well as the whistle blower protections, is to press people who do not now know of fraud to actually look into databases and find out if there in fact was fraud. Basically, it is not their job to keep track of what these potential fraudsters are doing, but with a monetary incentive, they may be willing to spend a few minutes looking to see if there is any.

  55. “AdderW (17:14:00) :
    […]
    The Met Office said it would get colder with more snow forecast.”

    They ALWAYS get their forecast wrong, that means it’ll get warmer, no?

  56. As much as I like the idea, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The CRU whistle blower did it for the right reason. Truth and honesty. Both seem to have gone out of fashion, so I was incredibly gob-stopped when the leak happened. Part of me still has to shake my head when I wake up to make sure I am not dreaming. Truth and honesty, the world needs more.

  57. The ‘scientists’ and colleagues might not turn, but what about the grad students and assistants? They handle the data, set up and often do the raw research, and compile a lot of the information. They also make bubkus. Let some of these young idealist believers start see people freezing across the land while their bosses are of in copenhagen swilling champagne and munching caviar and some interesting things might start popping out of the woodwork…..such as e-mail archive files and the like?

  58. DirkH (16:04:32) :

    “Anticlimactic (15:52:20) :
    […]
    I think I need to get a T-shirt printed : ‘Climate Modeller – Will Prove Anything For Money’”

    Make that ‘Climate Modeller – Will Prove Anything For Food’

    How about ‘Climate Modeller – Will Prove Anything for a bag of Coal!

  59. D. King (17:07:29) :
    Michael In Sydney (15:49:33) :

    He’s right, 30% of $50m is more than $12m…it is exactly $15m, how hard is that math to get right?

    Clizbe’s math prowess is sure to give Mann cause for trepidation.
    ———————————–

    Math prowess isn’t much of a requirement at a jury trial. In fact, it’s probably a negative.

  60. Jim Carson (14:10:02) :
    “Lovely thought, but the money’s gone. And the only reward is based on what recoverable. Which is nothing.”

    I’m not writing off the importance of the money that was lost, but getting the truth out is the important part.

  61. Dennis (15:54:20) : Challenge: Can anyone name something of valuable that has come out of academic research?

    Insulin – discovered at U of Toronto in 1921 by Banting, Best, Collip and McLeod.

    Penicillin -medical uses discovered by Florey and Chain 1939-40 at Oxford University.

  62. Speaking of the weather. Rockford, Illinois is expected to get 2 to 4 inches of global warming tonight. A low of 13F is predicted. According to the weather bug on my computer it is already 13F. I have noticed of late that the predicted temps seem about 4F higher than actuals. But of course without keeping records that could just be expectation bias.

  63. There’s no doubt that some day, hopefully in the not too distant future, people of influence who are deeply involved in the hoax of the century will be charged and taken to court. I can’t wait for that day. I bet many are hoping not only for global warming to return but to return with a vengeance. However, they are dreaming since there’s no evidence that it will happen. So, time will catch up with them. They can run but they can’t hide. Their careers will end with a big bang soon.

  64. The Met Office said it would get colder with more snow forecast.”

    They ALWAYS get their forecast wrong, that means it’ll get warmer, no?

    No, it’s just the Met Office looks so stupid now that they have to say soemthing that agrees with what’s actually happening. To do otherwise would put their very survival at risk as more and more people start asking questions as to why continue to waste millions of taxpayers money for such an incompetent service.

  65. Dennis (15:54:20) : Challenge: Can anyone name something of valuable that has come out of academic research?
    ——————————

    How about the entire biotechnology industry ??

    Dennis, do not confuse those half-wits with real scientists.

  66. WRT peoples inherent need to ensure that they continue to get paid… regardless of evidence that contradicts their position.

    “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

    Upton Beall Sinclair, Jr.
    I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got Licked, 1935

    REF: http://www.online-literature.com/upton_sinclair/

  67. What a snearing piece of amateurism! Hasn’t this fellow got something of substance to work on? This is classic UK gutter press fluff!

  68. This is classless.

    The whistleblowers will come forward regardless, if they have the info and the “orientation”. If they are in the AGW camp, no amount of money will entice them. And now, it will easier to paint the information as tainted.

    Really not something I’d want to be associated with, personally.

  69. The whistle should be blown on Pachauri, our railway engineer friend from the IPCC.

    K Ramamoorthy, a High Court Delhi Judge in a judgement stated Pachauri and his mates “have suppressed material facts and they have sworn to false affidavits.”

    http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/12/hypocrite-as-well-as-liar.html

    This is independent of the billions he is scamming with AGW:

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/world-mainmenu-26/europe-mainmenu-35/2683-pachauris-lucrative-world-of-climate-change

  70. rewarding whisleblowers is fine by me. hey, there’s no limit to what the CRU ‘whistleblower’ deserves – priceless!
    now we have:

    internal investigation at CRU
    internal investigaton at Penn
    internal investigation at BBC
    on/off internal investigation of IPCC

    see something wrong with these so-called investigations?

    then we have the demand by Senator Inhofe and a few other republicans for an independent investigation of IPCC, with no response it seems.

    what we need are INDEPENDENT investigations for all involved and that includes more than the above, as we all know.

    for now, let’s make sure we spread the information around as widely as possible because the media will not do it.

  71. More T-shirts:

    How about ‘Climate Modeller – Hockey Sticks have more fun!

    How about ‘Climate Modeller – Have station will travel!

  72. The recovery would not necessarily be from the individual, the recovery could easily be from the University due to insufficient oversight and poor management practices… such as the failure to find the flaws in the data used in various papers, failure to cooperate with FOI requests by the researcher and therefore failure to properly supervise the grantee, failure to use due caution in evaluating the controls on grant money as alluded to in several of the leaked emails…

    The thing that should be of greatest concern for the management of the University and the immediate supervisors of his partner in data fudging, J. Hansen is that they have prospered under a favorable blind eye from several administrations and the limelight is changing color and becoming very bright. What was overlooked and winked at like accepting gifts and other cash while on federal procurement rules will be looked at again while Murtha and Specter are gone or fighting for their lives. Once the U itself is under assault there will be no cover left for the proximate cause of the problem.

    Not a pretty picture no matter how hard they worked to get themselves into that pickle.

  73. If I was to receive $12 million with the penalty being that I will never be able to work again in the industry, I think that I should weep all of the way to the bank (and then to my Condo in Miami!).

  74. Hate to burst the bubble, really, I do…but Penn, or most any other university would never actually DO anything to jeopardize their image, much less funds. Sure, they’ll put on a good show, but their best fog machines will be covering up the shredders runnin’ 24/7.

    I know, I’m watching it happen right here at good ole UNR. Whistleblowers are treated to the full wrath of the administration.

    http://www.rgj.com/article/20091212/NEWS/912120346/Judge-partially-grants-petition-in-UNR-corruption-suit

    But I’m not losing hope. At least Mann and his cohorts are being exposed for what they are.

  75. “Knorr asserts (in the letter) “In the case of the greenhouse effect, people are wary of the complicated climate models that only a few experts understand.”

    Well whoop de do, Wolfgang, and where do you place yourself; in the elite panel of experts; who received the stone tablets on the mountain; or are you too among us incognoscenti ?”

    If an expert cannot explain a concept, in everyday language, to the average, intelligent high school student, then it is a fair bet that he does not understand the subject. Pompous, obscurantist language should not be mistaken for wisdom.

  76. Ambulance-chasing lawyers are as bad as disreputable scientists. This invitation to snitch isn’t noble. It’s an appeal to get rich quick. The folks at the Earth System Science Center shouldn’t be subjected to this. If it’s typical of most academic research operations, most are grad students and post-docs just trying to build careers. Dr. Mann’s dubious actions and character shouldn’t tar them.

    Frankly, I don’t like the implied endorsement of the idea by WUWT.

  77. Gary: “Frankly, I don’t like the implied endorsement of the idea by WUWT.”

    The nice thing about WUWT is that they REPORT the news, present several sides and let the chips fall where they may. You’re saying this should be suppressed? If WUWT was actually doing that, you comment certainly would not see the light of day.

    If you’re truly interested in “grad students and post-docs just trying to build careers”, you’d be the first to call for a full and completely independent investigation to lift the cloud from a generally fine university. Otherwise, the grad students would best burn their diplomas than claim to be a product of Penn State.

  78. pat (18:55:50) :

    rewarding whisleblowers is fine by me. hey, there’s no limit to what the CRU ‘whistleblower’ deserves – priceless!
    now we have:

    internal investigation at CRU
    internal investigaton at Penn
    internal investigation at BBC
    on/off internal investigation of IPCC

    see something wrong with these so-called investigations?

    then we have the demand by Senator Inhofe and a few other republicans for an independent investigation of IPCC, with no response it seems.

    what we need are INDEPENDENT investigations for all involved and that includes more than the above, as we all know.

    for now, let’s make sure we spread the information around as widely as possible because the media will not do it.

    First the internal investigation and the whitewash. then it becomes a conspiracy which means deeper pockets, criminal charges and plea bargaining.

    Much more fun :-)

  79. Gary (19:42:28) :

    “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing”
    Leo Tolstoy (translation)

    If the people who know do nothing then they are actually helping.
    Anyone helping may someday share the ‘tar’.

    Somtimes doing nothing, isn’t.

  80. Nice way to say happy new year, to Mann and co tho.Environment Canada insists the science for AWG is robust,but has been unable? unwilling? to supply reference list of same.Any clue as to who was responsible for reviewing the file before govt accepted IPCC science?What civil servant can be compelled to answer?Zero response from Minister of Enviroment,May 2009 till now.Thats to 2 written snail mail enquiries,numerous emails to dept no response.I suspect systemic failure of the nanny state,the CRU letters imply that no one did their homework in the Canadian Govt and $billions have been wasted.Canada is awash in govt protection agencies and the climategate data implies they are all PC frauds living off the taxpayer, where do I pry for info?Any ideas?Who is already doing follow up investigations?

  81. Connor (20:09:51),

    Thanx for that link! Did you happen to read the comments under the article? No?? Well, no wonder you’re calling the wrong side hypocrites. It’s a great contrast between WUWT and New Scientist, seeing that the majority of NS comments were censored out. The ones that were let through give you an idea of what the rest said, in spades.

    Also read the link-within-the-link to the odious Mr “Heaven’s” smarmy apologia for all things alarmist. Really, you couldn’t have picked a better article to show the bankruptcy of the integrity-challenged globaloney CRU. You’re not one of that disreputable crowd, are you?

  82. Connor (20:09:51);

    Whenever presented with any information one should consider the source and the motivation of both the presenter and mechanism that funded or enabled the creation of the information. Only then should one examine the information.

    I would not consider New Scientist to be a credible source of information, but that is only my opnion.

    About ‘New Scientist’

    New Scientist is printed by Reed Business Information Ltd, a subsidiary of Reed Elsevier. Reed Elsevier is owned by The Reed Elsevier group is a dual-listed company consisting of Reed Elsevier PLC and Reed Elsevier NV.

    At a 2009 court case in Australia where Merck & Co. is being sued by a user of Vioxx, the plaintiff alleged that Merck had paid Elsevier to publish the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine, which had the appearance of being a peer-reviewed academic journal but in fact contained only articles favorable to Merck drugs. Merck has described the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine as a “complimentary publication”, denied claims that articles within it were ghost written by Merck, and stated that the articles were all reprinted from peer-reviewed medical journals. In May 2009, Elsevier released a statement by Michael Hansen regarding the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine, conceding that these were “sponsored article compilation publications, on behalf of pharmaceutical clients, that were made to look like journals and lacked the proper disclosures”.

    Also: “Herman van Campenhout is Chief Executive Officer of Science & Technology at Elsevier … Prior to joining RBI, Herman spent 17 years with the Royal Dutch Shell Group”, Royal Dutch Shell provides funding to the CRU.

    So, the people that own, control, publish and distribute New Scientist print ‘science for money’ and the ‘Science and Technology Division’ is run by an ex Royal Dutch Shell executive.

  83. Gary: “Frankly, I don’t like the implied endorsement of the idea by WUWT.”

    I, for one, saw no implied endorsement. However if the feds are going to pass out our money, I’d rather see a one time check to whistleblowers than the continual skinning we’ve been taking at the hands of Mann and his alarmist ilk.

    Free the data! Free the code! We paid for it…

  84. Connor (20:09:51) :
    Why isn’t this being shouted from the rooftops here and at Climate Audit???

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18307-sceptical-climate-researcher-wont-divulge-key-program.html

    Where is the code! I demand an audit! When will the flood of FOIA request begin?!
    … Or are you a bunch of shameless hypocrites?

    NO. Are you???

    The DEFINING difference is that Scafetta’s work (right or wrong)….unlike that of Mann and company…is NOT being used to determine TRILLIONS of dollars of economic diversion and theft…..to feed the AGW machine.

    That is the defining difference.

    And on the skeptic side….there are plenty of A-lists who seriously question Scafetta.

    Listen to Leif chime in for a hot minute…..you definitely will not see a consensus on this side.

    So in reality, this weak attempt by NewScientist is nothing but a big fat red herring in an attempt to change the subject and shift the focus.

    Don’t worry, Connor….we are not easily distracted.

    But…by the same token, I will not stoop so low as to call you a “shameless hypocrite.”

    Nay. You are just misguided.

    Scafetta’s actions do not have any bearing WHATSOEVER on the documented fraud of the hockey team.

    You are confusing two SEPARATE issues.

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  85. Smokey – You are just deflecting now. The whole house of cards that is cosmic ray theory has come tumbling down with a deafening crash! This PROVES beyond all doubt that cosmic ray proponents are lying criminals covering up their fraud!! If Scarfetta is doing fraud then Linzden must be too, it is all a fraud!! And on the public dollar too! WAAAH! It’s a conspiracy! AGW theory has been vindicated!! This is definitive proof tha all alternative explanations MUST be fraudulent! I want an audit! I want to see these scurrilous frauds flooded with a deluge of crippling FOIA requests! I want a whistleblower to expose the whole fraud and claim his squillions of dollars that Scarfetta and all other cosmic ray researchers have been dudding the public out of. And I want it now!!!

  86. Andrew – When was the last time you questioned the motivation of Anthony Watts a FOX NEWS weathercaster!

    I love the smell of selective scepticism in the morning!

    So, does the fact that NS is published by a publishing company mean that Scarfetta has happily handed over the code? Or are you just deflecting with anything you can think of to deny that ALL cosmic ray theory is now suspect?

    [ I’ve not seen Anthony on Fox, and I think he no longer does live broadcasts, but he can reply if he read this. -mod ]

  87. Smokey – Oh, what a surprise, a post of mine has been censored! This is a conspiracy! Should I launch legal action against WUWT moderating policy, like the CEI are doing to RC???

  88. Connor (20:42:46):

    “Andrew – When was the last time you questioned the motivation of Anthony Watts a FOX NEWS weathercaster!”

    “Connor” pontificates about ‘selective skepticism’?? Dweeb.

    How about this proposal, Mr Connor: Everyone must publicly archive all of their raw and adjusted data, methodologies and code for public scrutiny within thirty days. Otherwise, it will be presumed that they have no basis for their claims.

    Then we will see who is lying for money and status, and who is doing honest research. Will you, Connor, post on realclimate your demand that the CRU and their ilk must put all their data and methods on-line for public access?

    Report back here with a link to your post. We want to see it.

  89. Conner;

    My approach to any new information is skeptical.
    Yours may not be, that is your choice.

    My comments did not include Anthony Watts, FOX News, Scarfetta, cosmic rays or any of the other distractions in your reply.

    I wrote what I though of a source that you had mentioned, nothing more. You can look into the funding and motivation of the entities that you have mentioned and form your own opinion.

    I am sorry if I have offended you by presenting my opinion.

  90. Connor,

    You are ill informed. There was a quite pointed discussion with Scafetta at Climate Audit on his refusal to provide his code: see http://climateaudit.org/2009/08/09/some-data-and-scripts-for-bs09/ . There was a similar discussion at Lucia’s Blackboard: see http://rankexploits.com/musings/2009/scafetta-should-share-code-period/

    Also note that Scafetta works at Duke, which is a private university, so your comment about FOIA requests is rather stupid.

    Any chance of you apologizing for your ignorance? Nah, didn’t think so.

  91. Andrew30 – So what you are trying to say is that Scarfetta DID release his code and NS are lying? Is that it? If not, then what the heck IS your point?

    I see the moderators here are still censoring my posts! Smokey, you should be appalled by this censorship? Where is the outrage!

    [ The post has now been fished out of the SPAM queue. To avoid the SPAM queue, avoid questionable words. FYI “fraud” has tossed my postings in the SPAM queue too. -mod ]

  92. There’s nothing worse than finding out your golden data has been transformed into a giant hoax, and now you really don’t have a whole lot of faith in what’s trotted out as historical data due to the depths to which the hoaxters sank.
    That’s a heapin’ helping of motivation, escpecially when it involves man’s favorite passtime: commenting about the weather.
    There’s a lot of paybacks clogging the lines, time to blow them out.

  93. Connor (21:00:07) :
    “So what you are trying to say is that Scarfetta DID release his code and NS are lying? Is that it?”

    I always say exactly what I mean to say. I did not say anything remotely similar to what you appear to have understood.

    Perhaps I should try and improve the clarity of my communication skills. It appears that there is a segment of the population that is not able to understand what I actually write.

    I am sorry if the presentation of my opinion confused you. I will make an effort to use a more appropriate lexicon in future.

  94. Dr A Burns (18:51:49) :

    “The whistle should be blown on Pachauri, our railway engineer friend from the IPCC. ”

    Speaking of the “Dismisser-in-Chief” … according to the U.K. Guardian, Pachauri’s already laying the groundwork for scapegoats in case Mexico City also fails. Well, the Guardian didn’t say that’s what Pachauri’s latest pronouncements amounted to, but that was my reading between the lines, so to speak:

    http://hro001.wordpress.com/2010/01/06/pachauri-predicts-and-protests-poverty-powerful-lobbies/

  95. Connor (21:00:07) :
    “So what you are trying to say is that Scarfetta DID release his code and NS are lying? Is that it? If not, then what the heck IS your point?
    I see the moderators here are still censoring my posts! Smokey, you should be appalled by this censorship? Where is the outrage!”

    Again…as I said in an earlier post, Connor, do not worry, we are not easily distracted.

    Nothing more needs to be said.

    Chris
    Norfolk, VA, USA

  96. Connor (20:09:51) :

    Why isn’t this being shouted from the rooftops here and at Climate Audit???

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18307-sceptical-climate-researcher-wont-divulge-key-program.html

     Nicola Scafetta is an honest upfront guy.  I am sure that not all the facts are on the table.  Lets see how this plays out.

    I am glad to see that you are espousing the idea that scientific data should be published for all to see.  I agree.  I wish more scientist shared this view.

  97. Connor,

    Still waiting for your realclimate post, demanding that they publicly archive all their raw and adjusted data and methodologies promptly, per the Scientific Method, and fully cooperate with all skeptical requests for added information and clarification.

    As if.

    And I’m waiting to read your response to HGI (20:58:26). Take your time. Make it good.

  98. M. Simon (15:39:51) :

    Esp. with voters breathing down the necks of the politicians.

    Ya, those politicians jump at the prospect of unhappy citizenry.

    /sarc off/

  99. Indiana Bones (15:47:47) :

    And honesty gets rewarded in this world.

    ———————————————————-

    I heard this story about a guy that told his girlfriend that he wanted her but once in a while he wanted a girl on the side—just for fun. That honesty wasn’t rewarded.

  100. Dennis (15:54:20) :

    In Eisenhower’s industrial complex speech, he also said

    “The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.”

    ———————————————————-

    Man oh man, talk about intuition!

  101. E.M.Smith (16:03:16) :

    So, can he get the money for turning himself in? Just thinking… ;-)

    ————————————————————–

    Michael Mann wouldn’t try that. Homer Simpson would……………and…

    Ok, I won’t go any farther with that.

  102. Gary: “This invitation to snitch isn’t noble.”

    Exactly. And that’s why fraudsters always have an unfair advantage.

    Do we have to stoop to the level of cheaters and fanatics for reason and freedom to prevail? Is there any other way? War?

  103. DirkH (16:05:59) :

    “Dennis (15:54:20) :
    […]
    Challenge: Can anyone name something of valuable that has come out of academic research?”

    ———————————————————

    In college one time I found it is bad, really bad, to mix piña colada, brandy, and beer. The results of the research were memorable and, well, a bit messy. I think I can still taste the piña colada today.

    No attempt should be made to replicate these results—take my word for it—the science is settled.

  104. The climate war is about to get nasty and dirty and after years of getting rolled over by the alarmist, the tide of battle has turn. Those not willing to pursue the routed enemy should turn their eyes as the realist “with sabers held high” smash into the flanks of the scurrying warmers. “Pursue, pursue do not let them regroup!” with legal cavalry in full charge “Sabers glint as the slashing begins its rhythmic motion”

  105. Mike Ramsey (21:18:30) :

    What you said is not true. You, and New Scientist, are conflating.

    Scafetta is not hiding it. This quote from the article at the link you provide shows that:

    Scafetta said the code in question had been submitted to a scientific journal and that if “the journal takes its time to publish it, it is not our fault”

    On the other hand Mann did not submitted his code to anyone.

  106. JRR Canada (20:27:18) :
    “Canada insists the science for AWG is robust,but has been unable? unwilling? to supply reference list of same.Any clue as to who was responsible for reviewing the file before govt accepted IPCC science?What civil servant can be compelled to answer?”

    You might start with this from Dr. Tim Ball.

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/18468

    “Control of Climate Policies by Unaccountable Bureaucracies; The Canadian Example”

    It includes names, dates, dollar amounts, sequences and timelines. It should give you a number of starting points. I have not had the time to look more closely into these players.

    Be methodical, good luck.

  107. E.M.Smith (16:22:06) :

    Dennis (15:54:20) : Challenge: Can anyone name something of valuable that has come out of academic research?

    Don’t know if this counts as ‘valuable’ but Bose radio technology. Wasn’t exactly research, actually was a term paper.

  108. DirkH (17:25:35) :

    “AdderW (17:14:00) :
    […]
    The Met Office said it would get colder with more snow forecast.”

    They ALWAYS get their forecast wrong, that means it’ll get warmer, no?

    They know Piers Corbyn well. They probably read his forecast first and then came out with this. ;-)

  109. While many dislike the concept of ratting on your workmates and the tone of the email, one thing is absolutely certain… humans react to incentives (read some Freakonomics if in doubt).

    Someone who is probably indifferent to Mann & Co is likely to step forwards if the incentive is high enough. What makes people think it is going to be an academic? Some underpaid staffer who sees far more of the accounting and knows where the money is … that is far more likely. Academic colleagues are hardly going to be witness to the cash flows relating to climate change research unless they are in the area itself. If that is the case they are hardly going to rat on a colleague.

    My money would be on a staffer in the finance section of the relevant department if anyone. Based on my experience in government and academia, the secretaries and HR folks know far more about what is going on in an institution than the professionals do. This is why I always go to lunch with the departmental secretaries on Fridays … keeps me in the loop :)

  110. philincalifornia (17:42:01) :

    Math prowess isn’t much of a requirement at a jury trial. In fact, it’s probably a negative.

    ———————————————-

    I still remember one of the jurors on the OJ trial; when she heard the DNA sample had shown that there was a 7 billion to 1 chance that the blood wasn’t OJ’s she said, “What are they talking about? There aint even 7 billion people on earth.”

  111. Erik Anderson (18:46:16) :

    “Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.” – Nietzsche, BG&E §146

    huh, was he talking about himself?

  112. Connor (20:09:51) :

    Where is the code! I demand an audit! When will the flood of FOIA request begin?!

    … Or are you a bunch of shameless hypocrites?

    ——————————————————————-

    You should read the article more closely. The code is already released.

  113. Connor (20:42:46) :

    Andrew – When was the last time you questioned the motivation of Anthony Watts a FOX NEWS weathercaster!

    —————————————————

    How long ago did you see him on there? …….me scratches head…… And even if he was what would it mean??

  114. I think it will be a sad day when scientific decisions are taken to court.

    It is due to the centralization of financing science and all the emphasis on products etc, trying to make scientific output pay. It has introduced the money factor into science, and we see what happens then.

    I keep proposing that financing research should go back to financing institutions rather than researchers. When researchers can bring lots of money to a university, they gain the upper hand and people like Mann, that is people who understand and can manipulate finances better than average get the upper hand. The bombastic over the quiet honest researcher. I have seen it happen in all the disciplines.

    Research financing should go to individual universities and research centers and the money distributed internally with a peer system that involves all disciplines: decide how much each discipline gets democratically. This gives a chance to the quiet an honest researcher to survive doing what he/she knows best, research, and not to run after bureaucracies for money. In addition this will introduce the lost competition between universities. Remember, there were “schools of thought” developed differently in different universities, and independent financing of universities will allow for rigorous testing of tentative hypothesis, as this AGW hypothesis was. If Lindzen had had his “school” financed as solidly as Mann got financed, we might be talking of a different world now.

  115. Conner

    Please also work on James Hansen’s delays with FOIA requests. I don’t think you want to give the appearance of hypocrisy. Please demand audit of him.

  116. John Egan (15:06:28) :
    Ughhh!
    Witch hunts –
    Regardless of the political affiliations of the witches and the hunters –
    Are never very pleasant affairs.

    1. Crimes have been committed.

    2. Most crimes are solved because someone who knows something talked to the investigators.

    3. QED…

  117. Photon without a Higgs

    A. I think Steve McIntyre is doing a good enough job of that himself

    B. See Wikipedia:

    Career

    Watts became a television meteorologist in 1987 when he joined WLFI-TV in Lafayette, Indiana, and KHSL-TV, a CBS affiliate based in Chico, California.[1] After working at KHSL for 17 years, he left in 2004 to became the radio meteorologist for KPAY-AM, a Fox News affiliate also based in Chico, California. Watts also operates several companies that make weather graphics systems for use on television broadcasts.[2]

  118. Again for photon,

    You should read the article more closely

    Scafetta said the code in question had been submitted to a scientific journal and that if “the journal takes its time to publish it, it is not our fault”. Benestad says the code he is asking for relates to papers already published.

  119. The way most grants work is that quarterly submissions are made and they are paid out.

    What will it be spent on?

    1. Salaries for junior staff.
    2. Computers and research tools.
    3. Uni. accommodation/maintenance costs.
    4. 10% goes to the principal grant holder to use ‘at their discretion’.

    I suspect you will only be able to go for section 4. Because the accommodation costs are sunk, the junior staff costs are sunk, the supercomputer access time is sunk and any PCs/Sun Workstations will depreciate like crazy.

    And if Michael Mann has used this to sub his lab, as many do, then they won’t be able to get that either.

    Only if he has used it as ‘a Wall Street-style ‘bonus” will there be a chance of recouping it.

    IMHO.

  120. With such an amount of money, anybody in need of it will try to say something. This has nothing to do with scientific investigation.

  121. In short, given the nature of the Obama Administration, no one should trust the Department of Justice to do its job. Maybe a brief way to summarize the situation would be to have people try to think of the Obama Administration as the U.N. now governing America.

    Therefore, outside interests need to be involved, which is what I assume a Lawyer specializing in helping Whistleblowers does, for a fee. So the Lawyer needs a Whistleblower reward. The Whistleblower can always refuse a cut or donate it usefully. I wouldn’t trust the DOJ under AG Holder to even handle the evidence correctly or to not instead demonize the Whistleblower.

    Among other very strange things, the Obama Adm. has already fired one Inspector General of Obama’s National Service operation for uncovering an $800,000 fraud involving the Mayor of Sacramento, Kevin Johnson. The Administration said the IG was ~”acting erratically” or something like that immediately after the IG nailed the fraud and got a $400,000 payback.

    Now if Obama were to suddenly have the EPA stand down and completely review the question of CO2 being a taxable “pollutant” just the way the FDA considers diseases and treatments – which would involve doing what the ipcc has not done, real science going as far back toward the beginning as necessary – that might change the Administration’s credibility, but I’d stll want to know who did all the brain transplants.

    Or maybe I don’t understand how the Whistleblower process works?

  122. After 2 totalitarian regimes here in Germany I am no more interested in whistleblowers.

    I expect to be a lot of political pressure on Penn State University and CRU in favour of Mann and Jones and my guts tell me that Mann, Jones and some more should appear before the international court in The Hague.

  123. This is exactly the right and much needed tack. Let’s get this in to the courts and shut this wasteful fraud down ASAP. This should be a slam dunk. And haven’t we all worked for a smug {snip} like Michael Mann that deserves a little justice?

    Blow whistles! Blow!

  124. “b.poli (02:31:30) :

    After 2 totalitarian regimes here in Germany I am no more interested in whistleblowers. ”

    b.poli, i’m german as well… don’t confuse whistleblowers with state-run spy organizations.

  125. I know how much you guys like evidence. So is there any actual evidence of a CRU whistleblower or is it all just wishful thinking?

  126. Sorry for off topic but during Prime Minister’s questions yesterday in the House of Commons Anne Winterton MP (Conservative) asked Gordon Brown if it was wise to spend GBP100Billion on windmills when the world was clearly cooling. At last the sceptics are starting to come out of the closet.

    In his response, by the way, he just said that this was another example of how the opposition party was split.

  127. anna v (23:20:07),

    You are exactly right. Big money has corrupted the system. Rainmakers like Mann and Jones not only control the grant money, they are given huge amounts of money by outside entities that the university has no control over. The CRU website listed the millions granted in 2008 alone to Phil Jones and others. But when climategate broke, that web page was unfortunately taken down.

    When Fenton Communications, or the Heinz Trust, or the Grantham Foundation allocate $millions only to those scientists actively promoting AGW, they are getting their money’s worth. But the taxpayers who will have to pay the $trillions, based on the corrupt and dishonest science that was bought and paid for by outside entities with a heavy pro-AGW agenda, are not represented.

    Corrupt scientists, working hand in glove with corrupt and devious outside organizations, have learned to game the system at the expense of the taxpaying public. If there is a way to make them accountable for their scam, I’d like to know how.

    I’d like to believe that b.poli (02:31:30) has the answer, but I know better. There is no way the same evil people that infest the UN and the EU have disregarded the ICJ. Like the young priest in The Exorcist telling the old priest about all the different Satanic voices and personalities, the old priest responded: “There is only one.”

  128. JER0ME (17:41:58) :

    DirkH (16:04:32) :

    “Anticlimactic (15:52:20) :
    […]
    I think I need to get a T-shirt printed : ‘Climate Modeller – Will Prove Anything For Money’”

    Make that ‘Climate Modeller – Will Prove Anything For Food’

    How about ‘Climate Modeller – Will Prove Anything for a bag of Coal!

    All very clever! I’m embarrassed to contribute my initial reaction…
    ‘Climate Modeller – Will Prove Anything for Some Warmth!’

  129. Connor (00:15:03) :

    Again for photon,

    You should read the article more closely

    Scafetta said the code in question had been submitted to a scientific journal and that if “the journal takes its time to publish it, it is not our fault”. Benestad says the code he is asking for relates to papers already published.

    ——————————————–

    Code and papers related to code are not the same thing.

  130. You are making claims that aren’t clear. What is you are trying to say? Come out and say it clearly. But It looks like you’re trying to create some kind of conspiracy.

    Also, if Scafetta is hiding something it’s just as wrong him to do it as any other scientist.

  131. Also Conner,

    Are you as hot about James Hansen’s not complying with FOIA requests as you are about this Scafetta issue?

  132. It will not have any consequences on them, they are heavily protected by the most powerful people in the world; if removed from their posts it would be only if their bosses click the refresh button and replace them by new ones. Right now they are surely in the selection process of, if possible, more faithful people among their servants.

  133. Photon:

    Massively scalar elementary response to each WUWT post will not hasten discovery of the Boson. A slightly less impulsive response might succeed though… peace.

  134. Conner

    you must be saddened and indignant at what ClimateGate revealed. Connection to big oil, manipulating data, altering computer code, intimidation.

    All of these must have shaken you.

  135. DJ Meredith (19:25:28) :
    Hate to burst the bubble, really, I do…but Penn, or most any other university would never actually DO anything to jeopardize their image, much less funds. Sure, they’ll put on a good show, but their best fog machines will be covering up the shredders runnin’ 24/7.
    I know, I’m watching it happen right here at good ole UNR. Whistleblowers are treated to the full wrath of the administration.

    http://www.rgj.com/article/20091212/NEWS/912120346/Judge-partially-grants-petition-in-UNR-corruption-suit

    From your link:

    The plaintiffs’ petition includes allegations of fraud, embezzlement, bid rigging, falsification of evidence and public documents, perjury, abuse of power, forgery, witness intimidation, civil rights violations and animal abuse

    May I be so impertinent to question exactly what the animal abuse applies to? Could this allegation also apply to Mann?

  136. Conner, you shot yourself in the Foot ( or mouth) with the link to RealClimate.
    You obviously didn’t notice the
    “selected sources of code and data”
    i.e. only those that they can afford to show, not “ALL”.

  137. @ Bernice (16:06:53) : The whistleblower program is a way out for those that recognize wrong doing. Financial motivation is secondary. The climategate whistleblower is just the tip of an iceberg that’s getting bigger .

    And I wonder just who that whistleblower is.

    Would Mann’s grad student(s) be willing to turn him in? Their careers are pretty much shot before they’ve even started; what do they have to lose? $15 million would keep them going for quite a while, I imagine.

  138. Rob Vermeulen (01:26:06) :

    With such an amount of money, anybody in need of it will try to say something. This has nothing to do with scientific investigation.

    Granted, but it sounds exactly like Climate Science. Ha ha…..

    Let full public disclosure and Civil and Criminal Trials sort it out. They’re also imperfect but that and the election process are the best we can do to avoid the next move, War.

  139. re: Kay

    I don’t think a grad student would have the necessary info/access to be a credible whistleblower. It would have to be a colleague who works closely with Mann, or on his projects, I would think.

  140. re: John Hooper (04:19:44) :

    “Ironic to see Wolfgang Knorr bashed in here considering he recently released a report that found any warming over the last 150 years could not be due to a rise in atmospheric CO2.”

    http://bristol.ac.uk/news/2009/6649.html

    It doesn’t say anything of the kind, not in this story and not in the actual study. Don’t jump to wild conclusions.

    “New data show that the balance between the airborne and the absorbed fraction of carbon dioxide has stayed approximately constant since 1850, despite emissions of carbon dioxide having risen from about 2 billion tons a year in 1850 to 35 billion tons a year now.”

    How does that match up with your your statement?

  141. I totally agree, Smokey.

    Smokey (05:12:32) :

    Corrupt scientists, working hand in glove with corrupt and devious outside organizations, have learned to game the system at the expense of the taxpaying public. If there is a way to make them accountable for their scam, I’d like to know how.

    If you look at what’s going on as a Parasitic-Communistic “Business Plan”, that helps to see it. The solution will involve a battle, first using all the proxies for War available, starting with rational analyses and obviously including Words and Statements wherever. They work.

    I’d like to believe that b.poli (02:31:30) has the answer [Internatikonal Court of Justice], but I know better. There is no way the same evil people that infest the UN and the EU have disregarded the ICJ. Like the young priest in The Exorcist telling the old priest about all the different Satanic voices and personalities, the old priest responded: “There is only one.”

    Again, I totally agree. Fantasies of a World Court or Government are just that, if only because they allow an easy access for Totalitarian Controllists, just as the U.N. system has. There must always be a niche for an effective counterforce to Totalitarianism. The rest of us really don’t care to even try for Totalititarian control, but Parasitic-Communists types do – call them anything you want, but their natures are basically the same and they do exist as a hominid form.

    That’s why previous American Administrations have eschewed the ICJ. Why should defenders of freedom and free individuals turn their fate over to The World when The World is obviously not anything like what America represents and has done – America’s mistakes and failures being acknowledged but notwithstanding in net and in comparison, if only as per Winston Churchill’s wry comment about such a system being the worst imaginable, until you compare it to everything else.

    Note, I’m using “America” as symbolic for any one or Country who agrees with what a free America represents, not to say that no one else shares these values or hasn’t counted or doesn’t still count in an equally important way.

    The answer is not to diss “America” but instead to join it in the form of independent actors – Countries and people – who know what America’s Constitution with its Bill of Rights represents, because it is what they are, free individuals with inherent rational powers who see it, know it, and recognize a subrational groupist threat when they see it.

    It helps me a lot to view what is going on now on a very large scale, as an Evolutionary struggle involving two different Hominid Forms, just has occurred in the past as Humans have evolved: currently it’s the more Parasitic and thereby less potentially successful who also react with classic bigotry to individual free thought – which they can’t really understand but sense in a basically bigoted way as some kind of threat, versus the more Independent individuals possessed of a creative free thought capacity which understands what it is, understands but has no interest in Totalitarian Thought Controllists – who view thought control as both a means and an end – instead sees all progress as a result of an individual free thought capacity necessarily dependent on the presence of institutionalized individual rights, and does not want to have to engage in War to survive. But will!

    Only by making the American type system, including real Science, work the way it was designed to, in regard to this large scale attempt by Totalitarians to take over as much as possible of the World by way of the U.N.’s ipcc “Climate Science”, will Totalitarianism be pushed back without either it holding sway to the detriment of freedom, or a large scale War eventuate.

    The American system itself as designed and expressed by the Framers of the Constitution is currently under the same threat internally represented by the U.N. with its “Climate Science” to whomever in the World, a threat again which itself is really “only” a massive thought control propaganda operation by Totalitarians in order to achieve more thought control, from which every other form of control follows.

    But, still amazingly, the signs are strong and getting stronger each day that the current Totalitarian Parasites here in the U.S., represented by the Obama Adm., are going to lose without the necessity of a real War. They are actually doing a pretty good job of self-destructing – by virtue of apparently being able to only act according to their Marxian “Marxisant” [effete] Political Science Fantasy World, which specifically denies Reality to the point that it almost can’t possibly work – even to benefit itself. Again, it’s amazing to see the actions this Adm. takes at least daily, which make no sense even concerning its own survival.

    Of course their machinations also threaten the rest of us here but in what is probably not itself a fatal way, even though it looks pretty bad so far.

    However, this somewhat unique feature – which probably allows Totalitarians to lose here in the U.S. without us having to resort to violence – also is probably due to the relative persistence of America’s and Americans’ “rogue” nature when it comes to wanting to be free. Anyone similarly fired should join up.

  142. AdderW (05:46:12),

    Thanks for that. I notice that quangos [quasi-autonomous non-elected government organizations; like NGOs – non-governmental organizations] such as Scorchio and Eco-change are already scrubbed from the site.

    Also, that grant funding is only what went to CRU over the years [a quick scan shows well over $4 million paid to Phil Jones and pals in just the last reported year].

    Oh, and thanx to Connor for the info on how successful Anthony Watts has been in his business carreer. I don’t use Wikipedia, but I’d bet that Connor has no page of his own like Anthony does. When a someone with no notable accomplishments becomes a site pest, they’re just a tool.

  143. Connor (20:40:11) :

    Smokey – You are just deflecting now. The whole house of cards that is cosmic ray theory has come tumbling down with a deafening crash!

    I missed the memo. Could you provide a link?

    My understanding is that the results from Svensmark’s CERN experiments are not due out until 2013 or there abouts. Please explain how the results can be shown to be in error if the results are not available?

  144. re: J. Peden

    ??????? I didn’t realize that there is a stunningly similar country called America on Mars . . .

  145. M. Simon (12:10:06) :

    “My understanding is that the results from Svensmark’s CERN experiments are not due out until 2013 or there abouts. Please explain how the results can be shown to be in error if the results are not available?”

    Mister Connor is obviously a climate ‘scientist’ and does not need experimental results.

  146. DirkH (08:22:50) :

    Cool down photon. (Open a window! ROTFL!)

    Yes, it is cold outside.

  147. photon without a Higgs (06:22:17) :

    Connor (00:09:48) :

    I asked what it would mean if Anthony Watts was on Fox News?

    What would it mean if New Scientist are published by whoever they are published by?

    Fox News is incredibly biased, which was the insinuation being made by whoever made that post I was replying to.

    I’m just holding a mirror up to the deniers, showing you what you look like to the sane people in the world.

  148. M. Simon – the link is there, go back and look for it, Benestad is asking for code from work already published. Scafetta won’t provide it, therefore it MUST be a conspiracy that definitively PROVES that all solar/cosmic ray theories must be fraudulent and corrupt.

    I’m just applying the same logic you people use.

  149. A C Osborn (09:13:00) :

    Conner, you shot yourself in the Foot ( or mouth) with the link to RealClimate.
    You obviously didn’t notice the
    “selected sources of code and data”
    i.e. only those that they can afford to show, not “ALL”
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Kind of like the portion of data that CRU can’t release because they don’t actually own it?

    photon without a Higgs (06:26:58) :

    You are making claims that aren’t clear. What is you are trying to say? Come out and say it clearly. But It looks like you’re trying to create some kind of conspiracy.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Oh the irony!

    Go and do a search on this page alone for th word “conspiracy”

  150. I was expecting something like this from the other side. How many times have we called them on some b.s. only to have them turn around and claim the same thing is being done to them. I howled when I saw that J. Hansen was claiming that he was being muzzled. Now they want the code released. The spin is incredible. Connor apparently has not been alive long enough to have seen even one weather cycle and now I will ask him the all important question. What kind of world do you want to see, Connor? Where do you see mankind in 5, 10 20, years?

  151. Did a search for the word conspiracy and it comes up 6 times. 2 out of those 6 were first uttered by Connor, and 2 were quoting what Connor had said. So 4 out of the 6 times were focused in and around Connor. Troll?

  152. Johnhayte (12:17:16) :

    re: J. Peden

    ??????? I didn’t realize that there is a stunningly similar country called America on Mars . . .

    Hayte, the only clue I get regarding the intent of your comment is your name. Do I need anything else?

  153. Connor:

    Kind of like the portion of data that CRU can’t release because they don’t actually own it?

    No complete data release = No Science.

  154. Connor (19:37:44) :

    “Fox News is incredibly biased, which was the insinuation being made by…”

    >>>

    How funny, Connor thinks the only place you can get any decent news or fresh reporting on cable is bias, but I’m sure he feels RC is perfectly centered in its approach to AGW coverage. It seems lately like RC has been over here checking out the audience and trying to divert a bit of traffic. Is it just me or do some of you smell some distress in the AGW air ?

    Maybe it’s just rotten air ?

  155. How funny, Connor thinks the only place you can get any decent news or fresh reporting on cable is bias, but I’m sure he feels RC is perfectly centered in its approach to AGW coverage.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    How funny, the person I was originally responding to think NS is biased, but I’m sure he feels that Fox News is perfectly centred in it’s approach to AGW coverage.

    You people a a buch of whackjobs

  156. Calling us whackjobs doesn’t get you off the hook from answering the questions posed to you. Is that all you got?

  157. “”” Mark (04:08:36) :

    I know how much you guys like evidence. So is there any actual evidence of a CRU whistleblower or is it all just wishful thinking? “””

    Well Mark, all you have to do is go to the site where the evidence relating to the alleged hackers is posted, along with an essaay on wishful thinking, and there you will find in a plain brown wrapper, the file on all the whistle blowers.

    See; no wishful thinkin just hard evidence.

  158. You people a a buch of whackjobs

    As for me, Connor, I accept your surrender without animosity. But I would advise you going forward to try to at least consider the possibility that the people who usually inform you are not credible and maybe not even trustworthy. You are probably young enough that taking a look at things for yourself from now on with an eye toward being sceptical about everything, until you yourself are reasonably satisfied about what is the most likely or “true”, will be of great benefit to you for the rest of your life.

Comments are closed.