It has started – the infighting begins in the court of public opinion.
Climategate: Phil Jones accused of making error of judgment by colleague
Here’s an excerpt:
One of the scientists to whom the emails were addressed, Professor Michael Mann, the Director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University has moved to distance himself from some of the comments in the emails that suggest scientists did not want the IPCC, the UN body charged with monitoring climate change, to consider studies that challenged the view global warming was genuine and man-made.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s The World Tonight, Prof Mann said: “I can’t put myself in the mind of the person who wrote that email and sent it. I in no way endorse what was in that email.”
Prof Mann also said he could not “justify” a request from Prof Jones that he should delete some of his own emails to prevent them from being seen by outsiders.
“I can’t justify the action, I can only speculate that he was feeling so under attack that he made some poor decisions frankly and I think that’s clear.”
Prof Mann then argued however that there was “absolutely no evidence” that he too had manipulated data, while he also said “I don’t believe that any of my colleagues have done that”.
Complete story here at the Telegraph:
Climategate: Phil Jones accused of making error of judgment by colleague
h/t to Kate at SDA
Do I detect a whiff of smouldering trouser seat?
The computer code is what is important here. Code is the automated process to turn data into results. It’s meta-math.
I think of this code as like Hamilton’s mathematical proof of Poincare’s Conjecture. He suggested using “surgery” to iron out singularities in a 3-manifold. But he couldn’t say HOW – and so, not only did he not get the credit, but his whole method was discredited. (Hamilton himself warned readers that this was not a full proof, so please understand this as NOT an attack on Hamilton’s genius or integrity.) Grisha Perelman showed us how to use his method, and so he got the credit.
I don’t have a problem with “surgery” in the code – as long as it has documentation that it’s there because of the data and not because of the result (the latter is cheating). So if your code is undocumented such that it looks like it does its surgery arbitrarily, it’s a “Hamiltonian” partial solution at best, and doesn’t prove anything.
I believe I’ve been snipped. I guess I’m kind of flattered!
I think Mann is going to discover there’s plenty of room under the bus for him, too. The emails make it pretty clear that even Briffa did not believe in Mann’s anti-Medieval-Warming use of Briffa’s work.
Buying shares in Orville Redenbacher.
Excellent.
Next, we will see some papers withdrawn.
But until the IPCC itself is shown as the propaganda sock puppet it is, we will not be able to see policy makers find face-saving ways out of this mess.
the real story will be when some very enterprising reporter follows the money.
There is a great huge money train in this to follow.
“absolutely no evidence that he had manipulated data”
I laugh every time someone (usually a politician) uses this defense.
He didn’t say he didn’t do it, just that there was no evidence that he did it.
“Curiouser and curiouser.”
I believe I’ve fallen through the looking glass.
WATTS next, I wonder?
Another article on Copenhagen from the BBC.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8392611.stm
I loved this bit –
“There is a consensus among the world’s scientists that climate change is real and there’s a need to confront it,” said Michael Mann from Pennsylvania State University in the US, a leading palaeoclimatologist.
“Those who are advocating inaction, that don’t want to see progress in Copenhagen, don’t have science on their side.
“Instead they’ve manufactured this false controversy to distract the public and to distract policymakers, to try to thwart progress in Copenhagen.”
“Prof Mann then argued however that there was “absolutely no evidence” that he too had manipulated data…”
He did not say “I did not manipulate data.”
Just for those, like me, who are not too well up on Bart/OJ Simpson.
Jerry (09:58:49) :
“And I went to Penn State too, dammit!”
gwhiz (10:46:17) :
“Jerry, I too went to PSU (‘82 Geophysics) it the same College as Mann (E&MS). I’ve written them and strongly demended that they look into this thoroughly and not just whitewash it. They responded with a form letter which didn’t make me feel confident. ”
I didn’t attend PSU, but my son just graduated from there, so I took it upon myself to write a letter to the _Collegian_, the student paper. I submitted it online, and yesterday got a call from a nice young man up there to confirm I’d written the letter. It was published today — you can see it here ( http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2009/12/03/psus_investigation_integral_in.aspx) if you like.
Another letter from an actual alum was published on the 1st, so at least the student paper is open to comments about the investigation.
The rest of you PSU alums — get crackin’!
Do these ‘scientists’ have to disclose their financial data? It would be interesting to see if any of them have made money off trading carbon offsets.
mikey (09:55:26) :
I was amazed at how few were fairly obviously incriminated. All down to who you know! 😉
Jerry (09:58:49) :
But not the State Pen I assume. 😉
DaveE.
This is starting to develop the elements of the “prisoners dilemma.” If one defects by testifying against the other, while the other remains silent, the defector gets off scott free and the other takes the full rap. If both remain defensive however, they will both be implicated on minor charges. Finally, if each betrays the other, they will both be implicated but to a lesser degree that in the first case.
In the classic form of this game, cooperating is strictly dominated by defection so that the only possible equilibrium for is for each player to defect. This is because no matter what the other player does each player will always gain the greatest payoff by defecting.
The form of the game actually playing out, is slightly different, since each player can actually see the actions of the other. Jones can see what appears to be a defection by Mann. This would seem to make defecting a more probable play by Jones. The other pecularity is that this is a multi multi player game, and none of the other players have yet shown their hand. One prediction is that the more players who start to show defection behaviour, the more the probability that the others will defect.
We shall see.
A couple of problems with scapegoats:
1) They know too much
2) They have no incentive to keep their mouths shut
The only way for corrupt science to save their corrupt data is huge golden parachutes for those most closely tied to this most recent revelation. They will have to be paid off or shut up some other way or the book millions will start rolling in and CAGW will be a distant memory. I think the handwriting is on the wall for CAGW.
In one exchange, Jones tells Penn State’s Michael Mann: “If they ever hear there’s a Freedom of Information Act in the U.K., I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone.” He even asks Mann to join him in deleting e-mail exchanges about an IPCC assessment report: “Can you delete any e-mails you may have had with Keith re: (the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report)?”
investor.com
Mann is in denial. Where was Mann in writing discouraging the Mannipulation of data, software and publications?
Poor busdriver, that is going to be one bumpy ride for him 🙂
I’d love to know what I’ve done to deserve to be sent straight to the spam bin.
I’m on a static IP so unless anything with this nick that does not come from that IP is false.
DaveE.
Let me get this straight…
Mann is criticizing Jones??!
That’s like Robin “the boy wonder” tossing Batman under the bus.
Doc
I don’t know if I’d go so far as to say he threw Jones under the bus.
But in the interview Mann did show again what a fraud and a liar he is.
My dad used to say: put a bunch of crooks in a room, and it’s just a matter of time before they starting screwing each other.
Excellent points boballab (10:58:27).
The aftermath of the Climategate Email Release is beginning to stir as much anxiety as the Release itself – no easy feat. This could take on a pinball metaphor. How many points per Alarmist?
And as Horner’s FOI of GISS developes add more digits to the display.
Climategate aka the Mann-hole. 😉
Ah…now I know. It’s Mike’s trick to hide his decline.
2 minutes ago, Rush made a simple observation about Jones and the CRU.
“They got caught”
It is simple. Mann is a member of the gang green. Mann got caught and is passing the blame. I don’t care what Mann says about his intellect, research, the conspiracy or anything else. He got caught.
Dagfinn (11:55:19) :
Climategate aka the Mann-hole. 😉
So Mann’s excuse is labeled:
Mann-hole cover.
The achronym is CYA.