
Reprinted with permission from the authors.
Yes, Virginia, you do have to produce those ‘Global Warming’ documents
Today, Virginia taxpayers, a state lawmaker and a public interest law firm are asking the University of Virginia to produce important “global warming” records under that state’s Freedom of Information Act. These are records the school no longer denies possessing but nonetheless refuses to release, even to Commonwealth Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli. They address one of the most high-profile claims used to advance massive economic-intervention policies in the name of “global warming.”
In response to a previous FOIA request, U.Va. denied these records existed. However, during Cuccinelli’s pre-investigation under the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act (“FATA”), a 2007 law passed unanimously by Virginia’s legislature, which clearly covers the work of taxpayer-funded academics, U.Va. stunningly dropped this stance. For this reversal, the taxpayers of Virginia owe Cuccinelli a debt of gratitude.
Still, the school has spent upward of half a million dollars to date fighting Cuccinelli’s pursuit, now before the Virginia Supreme Court. However, Virginia’s transparency statute FOIA gives the school one week to produce the documents, and offers no exemption for claims U.Va. is using to block Cuccinelli’s inquiry.
These e-mails and other documents relate to claims made by Michael Mann to obtain, and claim payment under, certain taxpayer-funded grants. Mann worked at the university’s department of environmental sciences when he produced what was hailed at the time as the “smoking gun” affirming the theory of catastrophic man-made global warming.
Despite that lofty honorific, persistent controversy led promoters of this notorious “Hockey Stick” graph (principally, the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC) to stop advancing it as serious work.
Leaked “ClimateGate” e-mails discussing these same controversies prompted Cuccinelli’s pre-investigation. Sadly, in order to keep the taxpayers’ advocate from examining the evidence, U.Va. has offered a series of twists on a novel defense of “academic freedom.”
Now we with the American Tradition Institute’s environmental law center have requested these documents under FOIA and will presumably put an end to these tactics of denial followed by delay.
Importantly, also under FOIA in late 2009, the pressure group Greenpeace sought, and was promised, e-mails and other materials of Patrick Michaels, who also formerly worked in the same university department.
While the university proceeded to compile the material for Greenpeace, one of us, Virginia Del. Bob Marshall, R-Prince William, thought to ask for records relating to Michaels’ former colleague, Mann. Oddly, the university informed Marshall that such records no longer existed because Mann had left the department.
Michaels has stated that the university, in explaining to him these disparate responses, asserted that some people’s records are treated differently than others. Mann’s were allegedly destroyed; Michaels’ were being packaged for delivery to Greenpeace.
One disparity possibly helping to explain the other was that Mann had been an active participant in the IPCC, obtaining many research grants for his work at U.Va. But Michaels had been a very politically incorrect, high-profile “skeptic” of catastrophist claims such as those represented by the IPCC, and particularly Mann’s Hockey Stick.
In court in August, U.Va. opted against robustly defending, as a legal argument, its academic-freedom rationale for refusing to produce the records. Yet even this week, it is asking the Virginia Supreme Court to deny Cuccinelli’s request for documents possibly showing whether the dense Hockey Stick smoke indeed indicates fire. This does Virginia taxpayers a disservice.
Other records obtained under FOIA reveal that U.Va. has been paying Washington lawyers several thousand dollars per day to deny the requested transparency. As such, in a separate request, we also seek information about this privately underwritten effort to avoid complying with Cuccinelli’s inquiry.
The university has previously demanded taxpayers pay thousands of dollars for a FOIA search for Mann’s records, on the grounds that it maintains a broadly dispersed record-keeping system. Therefore, we have specifically directed the school to only search the backup server it claimed to the attorney general’s office that it finally located as the likely home of the Mann records. As such, demands for huge search fees should not be an obstacle.
We hope for prompt university compliance with FOIA, although we are prepared to fully protect our appellate rights. As Virginia taxpayers, we also hope to see U.Va. rise to its reputation and reflect the highest fidelity toward its statutory and other obligations.
We can then, finally, determine what it is that so many have gone to such great lengths to keep the public from knowing about that for which the public has paid.
Christopher C. Horner is senior director of litigation for the American Tradition Institute’s law center and a Virginia resident; David W. Schnare, Ph.D is a Virginia resident and a federal attorney, Del. Bob Marshall is a Virginia Republican delegate representing Prince William County.
Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/2011/01/yes-virginia-you-do-have-produce-those-global-warming-documents#ixzz1AEpTl1dZ
http://www.atinstitute.org/blog_post/show/58
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I never could get behind Cuccinelli’s action because it’s always seemed politically motivated.
I can totally get behind a straight-forward FOI request, though. The public gets what the public wants, because the public owns it. Simple.
As I understand it, the University were more than willing to hand over similar information to Greenpeace against a global warming sceptic.
I think the saying is “hoisted on their own petard”!
They cannot simultaneous say they had to hand over sceptic information and then claim immunity for warmist propaganda …. but I’m forgetting …. this is the Alice in Wonderland world of “global warming” where snow is “yet further proof of warming”.
I doubt there’s any chance that we’ll get to see this information till hell freezes over:
(For a view of Hell Beck in Cumbria see: http://v-g.me.uk/Trips/T0730/T0730.htm)
You mean academia isn’t special and exempt from following the law like the rest of us mortals? Why, that’s an outrage! What’s the point of remaining in academics if we’re not privileged?
Moses had to produce the evidence, only because he was conservative and wasn’t tenured.
Good news. It will be interesting to review the material produced (assuming that it is produced).
One can not help wonder why a quasi public institution such as U. Va should spend so much money in obscufating. Is this a reasonable use of public money?
One cannot help but think that the reasons behind the motive lies in ‘follow the money’
This isn’t science. You don’t hide your methods and data.
Here’s your dumb question of the day:
What would stop them from manufacturing the documents, or redacting embarrassing bits? Without the originals, how will the lawyers know if they’ve got the real documents or something made up to satisfy the request?
Those UVa officials who have spent more than half a million dollars fighting this FOIA request should be terminated and have to pay that expenditure out of their own pockets!
These people forget who they work for–as indicated by their school’s name: “University of Virginia”. The gall of these academia midgets is appalling!
They are too important to be bothered. Like James hansen has time to march and picket coal mines but too busy to remit FOIA requests also.
The school has sadded to it’s trouble by saying they don’t exist and they actually do.
If they actually had been destroyed, that is also a problem.
Virginiagate? Let’s hope so. ;>)
The other items is Virginia is on Christmas break. Except for a Basketball game or two which does have its own coaches, they are not very busy. They have till Friday to turn in their homework assignment.
Why is the University of Virginia fighting this thing so hard? If Mann’s work was Kosher you’d think they would rush to release knowing there was nothing to hide. Perhaps the old saying does apply here: There’s no smoke without fire.
As a former employee of a university archive I call total B.S. that they destroyed Mann’s papers/emails… unless there was something to hide and he did it himself. The University would never destroy the records of a faculty member, especially one as high profile as Mann.
——–
“Michaels has stated that the university, in explaining to him these disparate responses, asserted that some people’s records are treated differently than others. Mann’s were allegedly destroyed; Michaels’ were being packaged for delivery to Greenpeace.”
given the obvious association with Mann – the best we can hope for is that they (the U.Va) do produce the goods and that they don’t do a good job of cleaning them up (via redactions) or deleting them – and then we might be able to finally nail the coffin lid down on some warmists claims.
What is the penalty if they don’t deliver? Can the attorney general then ‘seize’ the server? or do they just get a fine? (if it’s the latter, maybe one can expect the likes of Gore to cough up to protect the warmists backs?)
Robinson says:
January 6, 2011 at 5:06 am
Here’s your dumb question of the day:
What would stop them from manufacturing the documents, or redacting embarrassing bits? Without the originals, how will the lawyers know if they’ve got the real documents or something made up to satisfy the request?
Is there not a time stamp on computer files that will show when they were last altered, a UK doctor who murdered dozens of elderly patients was convicted by checking his computer files, he altered them after death but didn`t know of the time stamp.
If the University of Virginia is involved in a fraud in one department there may be concern that it is not isolated. And that is not good for enrollment.
UV should clear this up now rather than have it grow.
The state exercises oversight on universities and the delay in producing proof of their science will only magnify the consequences.
Simon Hopkinson says:
January 6, 2011 at 4:45 am
“I never could get behind Cuccinelli’s action because it’s always seemed politically motivated. ”
Sorry to object Simon but did not Greenpeace making a political move on Michael? I am no expert on U.S. politics but there really is a bad smell about all this and even though Cuccinelli is a politico..why has the University of Virginia wriggled like a fish? Lets get it all out in the open!
To be honest, Mann is already proven to be a shaky scientist due to the emails and M and M. The real target should be Hansen!
This sounds like very good news to me. The U of V’s stance really annoys me as I find their use of the term ‘academic freedom’ to be more than a little perverted.
The history of this planet has alway been a slow warming after an Ice Age.
The trick is what happens after all the ice is melted. Pressure builds and a triggering effect takes place to cool again and start the process of warming again.
I wonder what Thomas Jefferson would think of the UVA today.
As Steve says, if you won’t let me see the data then it’s not science. Mann’s papers should be withdrawn, as should any papers that rely on his, and so on.
Robinson Asked:
“What would stop them from manufacturing the documents, or redacting embarrassing bits?”
This is actually more difficult than it sounds. One must make corresponding alterations to the headers of e-mails and assure that the meta-information in the file system reflects the date that the e-mail was received. Something that a competent computer nerd could easily accomplish. Of course in accomplishing it said nerd would now have committed a felony (obstruction). An easily discovered felony if someone somewhere were ‘cc’d’ on the e-mail and produced a duplicate that doesn’t duplicate. Also easy to get caught if one little step in a number of little steps is missed.
I need to sign up for that course in lying. I suck at it and could use a college level course in it.
Jimbo says:
“Virginiagate? Let’s hope so.”
Wasn’t the real damage done in watergate the cover-up rather than the original crime. Let’s be honest, Mann’s Hockey stick is a pretty abysmal bit of work and if they’d just come clean at the beginning the fall out would be one academic whose work didn’t really contribute much to the sum of human knowledge anyway.
Instead, they have all dug themselves into a hole, because when dubious practices were exposed the science and academic community, far from publicly condemning the practices, they did all they could to protect those involved; backing them to the hilt with their own reputations.
And now instead of Mann being a fall guy, whole institutions have their reputations at stake! Well serves them right! And the longer they try to hide the information, the bigger will be the scandal when it finally breaks … so let’s hope they do try to obfuscate as long as possible!
As for Virginiagate …. I don’t like it … I think it should be called “Snowgate” …. which is a lot like Watergate … but a lot colder!
Pull My Finger,
“The University would never destroy the records of a faculty member, especially one as high profile as Mann.”
I agree. A year ago, Mann was a celebrity. UVa would have been proud to have access to his emails. They probably saw themselves as the guardians of posterity, looking forward to greeting the Historians and Writers of the future.
Nowdays, they probably aren’t so sure.
Taxpater funded grants = Taxpayer owned work!!!!! There is no acedemic freedom with taxpayer funded work!