Paul Chesser at the American Spectator tips me via email to a TV news report from WHTM-TV in Harrisburg, PA. WHTM is the TV station whose DMA covers State College.
Chesser writes:
Following up from yesterday, the ABC news station in Harrisburg did a fair-and-balanced story about the Commonwealth Foundation‘s call for an outside, independent investigation of Penn State’s Climategate scientist, Michael Mann.
Here’s the video news report:
Transcript here:
ABC27: Penn State at Center of Global Warming Debate
Peter B
I agree about Mann. http://assassinationscience.com/climategate/ makes it very clear what sort of person he is.
Beth: Nothing!
Now that the station has gotten involved there will be a follow-up. Reporters will dig for dirt—that’s how they get ratings. If they can scoop a story of a cover-up they will—it is likely to go national at least, and will lead to fame and revenues.
They are likely to have people working on the Climategate emails as we speak to be prepared for the continuation. They are smart enough to know that AGW is a hot button with many viewers. Mix it with scandal and you have a potent brew for broadcast news ratings.
Not a good environment for a cover-up.
savethesharks (19:31:43) :
I really have come to HATE the smirk Michael Mann has on his face.
It is a similar smirk to that of Gavin Schmidt…..and Phil Jones…..and Kevin Trenberth….and Ben Santer….etc…..et al…..ad nauseum.
Anyone else ever notice that pattern?
I know what you mean. I am normally such a placid person but the smirks of Al Gore & Michael Mann and the arrogance & rudeness of George monbiot make me have extreme violent thoughts!
Michael Jankowski (22:29:20) :
Picked on, baldness…maybe.
I hear Mann is a very bright fellow. I wonder if that’s a big part of his problem. Some extremely intelligent criminals don’t bother to take care of very simple evidence for one apparent reason: they think they are so smart and that everyone else is so stupid that nobody is going to catch them.
I get the sense Mann has this sort of smugness of superiority about him.
He has probably also never been put into his place when it comes to battles of intelligence, and he’s too set in his age, ways, and ego to start now.
In any case, he’s certainly not very professional, and he’s certainly not “normal” in dealing with criticism.
He shows the traits of narcissistic personality disorder. Judging by the emails he cannot cope with criticism very well and cannot understand why on occasions he wasn’t asked to peer review papers.
I think the hockey stick graph shows the up-curve of his own ego and sense of self-importance!
The answer to the professor’s puzzle is “NOTHING.”
Pamela Gray (20:46:33) :
I think this is a lesson for all of us to learn. We may not claim this for ourselves but we should. Belief trumps data. There are those among us skeptics whose hands are in this same cookie jar. The data isn’t there but we believe anyway.
If I believed that belief trumps data, I would not be a scientist .
Can we be as skeptical of our belief in own point of view as we are of AGW? If not, we are no better theorists than the ones being investigated. Do I believe it’s the Sun? The oceans? Land use? Planetary gravity? Atmospheric oscillations? Cozmos’ moon? How well would my theory hold up under such a white hot magnifying glass?
Skepticism is a necessary ingredient in being a scientist.
But AGW skeptics may come from many different theories. There is no reason to have to choose an alternate theory as proven. It is enough to disprove the AGW thesis, and this has been done.
And let us not lose the point: It is the politicization of the AGW theory that is the problem, with the resultant world population sufferings to be imposed by cap and trade, and the ones that have already been imposed by the bio-fuels fiasco.
Does the world care if Reggi poles are no longer in and the standard mode is SU1XSU2XSU3? The same would be true of climate science disputes if they were not impacting on policy and the climatologists had not become politicians.
I
And right where I’m at in central PA, on antenna, WHTM went away after the digital TV transition. Oh well.
———
@ur momisugly Michael (19:08:33) :
“Clustersource”? That is now a word? Sorry, but when I hear cluster-anything only one time-worn phrase comes to mind, which is descriptive of the IPCC, the Hockey Team (largely post-Climategate), and even the Copenhagen climate conference. Thus I feel “clustersource” should not be used in association with WUWT, if at all.
The mainstream media have grabbed the AGW ball and ran with it just like they did with cold fusion. Millions of dollars were spend to prove that it worked. Now our government and several others have spent millions to prove that something exists viz., man made CO2 causes global warming. There are probably other examples where science was hyped to save the planet or humanity and later on did not pan out. Nuclear energy is an example where the media was used to end US involvement in developing sources of nuclear energy. As far as I know the scientists who promoted cold fusion were never convicted of scientific fraud. By the time that AGW fails to pan out as a viable explanation of climate change the CRU conspirators will be retired.
I do not think that Dr. Mann’s future depends upon being convicted of scientific fraud. If were him I would be worried that an US government accountant will find out that he authorized the use of US government grant money improperly to promote his ideas outside of science. That failing, if it exists, is a lot easier to prove in court.
I have to agree with Aunty Freeze. The grin and the personal attitudes, including paranoia and tantrum, displayed by many of these people suggest the likelihood of narcissistic personality disorder, particularly perhaps in Mann, but also in others involved in the AGW hoax (I include Gore in this “diagnosis”). It is typical of those who believe they cannot be wrong and who essentially adopt fundamentalist positions which are not subject to either question or alteration or even obvious facts. You can often see it on the faces of religious fundamentalists too.
These NPD types also despise, belittle, bully and attempt to destroy anyone who challenges their inadequate work, behaviour and personalities. As such they are also inevitably and fundamentally anti-scientific, since objective science is not the driving force but the preservation of their intensely fragile inner selves. We are not dealing with scientists in some of these cases, we are faced with men whose basic purpose is to remain in control at all costs, whatever that may mean to other people (whose existences are irrelevant). Truth has nothing to do with it.
I went to the TV station’s web site and posted the following. I was surprised to see the moderator approved the posting.
Newt
> posted by: newtlove on 9:17 pm on 01/13/10
This article is rich! If 3 faculty-admins at Penn State can give the world an independent assessment of Michael Mann and his “trick” to “hide the decline,” then I want Penn State to lead the charge, the next time there is a major DoD contractor scandal, to let 3 executives of the offending contractor, i.e., Lockheed Martin, or Boeing, or Northrop Grumman, et cetera, to perform the “independent audit.” The next time there is a $450 hammer or a $600 toilet seat, Penn State needs to be on TV telling us that we can trust the independence of those 3 insiders! Remember when former Boeing CFO, Michael Sears, was sent to prison? Well, I’m sure that Boeing CEO (at the time) Phil Condit would have been able to stand with two other Boeing execs and smile into the camera and say, “Nothing to see here. Move along.” Instead, Boeing paid $615 million in fines to settle charges of defense contracting fraud, escaping criminal charges as a result.
So, if you let Penn State do its own whitewash, then you have to let Boeing, LockMart, NorthGrum, et cetera whitewash, too. After all, Mann’s testimony already forced the “twisty-fluorescent” light bulb on us, and Cap-and-Trade will cost us $Billions. The DoD frauds are looking small compared to the Carbon-Trade scams.
Newt Love (my real name) newtlove.com
Aerospace Technical Fellow, Modeling, Simulation and Analysis
TGSG (23:18:00) :
mpaul (19:58:35) :
“Massachussetts, Pennsylvania, and I believe Virginia were all originally commonwealths before the Revolution and continue to use that term to describe themselves.”
Kentucky is also a commonwealth. The correct answer to ‘how many states are there in the US?’ is 46.””
I believe Texas still considers itself to be a “Republic” so the real answer would be 45. 🙂
But our fearless leader, el presidente, claims there are 57.
Newt Love (05:30:33) : ” a $450 hammer or a $600 toilet seat”
OT but I must try to put an end to this misinformation. If someone were to produce a product and make only one of that product the entire cost of propduction would be reflected in the price of that one unit. So when NASA needed a specially designed hammer or toilet seat and needed only a few, the entire cost is reflected in those few units. If they had produced 1,000,000 of each for the public to purchase the unit cost would be much lower. Always keep in mind figures lie and liars figure. (that’s what makes us skeptics isn’t it?)
Corporations have to be audited by an independent company. Banks are also audited by the Fed. Why isn’t academia the same way? Put a former prosecutor, some experienced investigators and a few scientists on a team and let them investigate.
September 19, 1996: email 0843161829
Two days after the previous exchange, Gary Funkhouser reports on his attempts to obtain anything from the data that could be used to sell the message of climate change:
I really wish I could be more positive about the … material, but I swear I pulled every trick out of my sleeve trying to milk something out of that. … I don’t think it’d be productive to try and juggle the chronology statistics any more than I already have—they just are what they are … I think I’ll have to look for an option where I can let this little story go as it is.
………..Mann had many try to help Mannipulate the data
And the fallout is growing.
http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2010/01/13/13climatewire-insurance-group-says-stolen-e-mails-show-ris-91554.html
h/t Benny Peiser
I wonder if he does stay how much of his research money will dry up. Who would want to pay Mann or for that matter any of the clowns caught up in climategate anything to conduct any kind of research. If I was a company I certainly would not want to pay a man who is going to cook the books so that he can get more money out of me.
So regardless of the results of the investigation I believe that both Michael Mann of Penn State, and Chris Jones of CRU will see their funds slowly dry up.
Can his PhD be stripped from him? If so, what would he have to have done in order for that to happen?
mandolinjon (04:05:19) :
Personally, I don’t consider Cold Fusion to be in the same category as AGW. LENR research continues, and my bet is that within a decade, there will be some working device on the market. It’s big in Japan where they really need cheap and reliable energy sources.
Pons and Fleischman were, imo, honest scientists, and amongst the people who ripped them apart were the special-interest fusion specialists who didn’t want to see their megabuck funding go down the drain. So I see LENR as being more akin to AGW scepticism, and the opposition, to AGW alarmism.
Only time will tell, and I could be wrong of course, but it pains me to see certain comparisons being drawn, just as it pains me to see all AGW sceptics labelled as right-wing Creationists when many, like me, are centrist pro-Evolutionists.
Did anyone see this?
http://www.nationalcenter.org/PR-Michael_Mann_Money_011410.html
“Economic Stimulus Funds Went to Climategate Scientist”…Mike Mann. The $541,184 grant is for three years and was initiated in June 2009. The tone of the article isn’t even the point…this guy got half a million dollars and for what?
Mods, I swear this isn’t spam. If anyone wants to order a custom little hockey stick like in the video to keep around their office, this site has them:
http://www.ministicks.com/ministicks_com_plastic_ministick_p/ministick_cpp.htm
There are other sites too if you google “custom mini hockey sticks.”
Pamela Gray (20:46:33) :
I think this is a lesson for all of us to learn. We may not claim this for ourselves but we should. Belief trumps data. There are those among us skeptics whose hands are in this same cookie jar. The data isn’t there but we believe anyway.
Can we be as skeptical of our belief in own point of view as we are of AGW? If not, we are no better theorists than the ones being investigated. Do I believe it’s the Sun? The oceans? Land use? Planetary gravity? Atmospheric oscillations? Cozmos’ moon? How well would my theory hold up under such a white hot magnifying glass?
I am not trying to:
Bring down western civilization
Establish UN control over the world economy
Line my own pocket like UN IPCC chief Pachauri and Al Gore
While acting to subvert scientific checks and balances
I think that it is a mistake to put the arsonist and the fireman on the same moral plain.
Michael Ramsey
Kay: I like the “previously-prestigious CRU”. I must remember to use that phrase in future.
I presume that Dr. Mann must receive the full advantage of reasonable doubt in the case of this investigation. In order for censure, the results of his research must be proved false beyond any reasonable doubt and even if that be the case, I assume it must also be proved beyond any reasonable doubt that Dr. Mann knew his research was defective.
I am not confident that, even in the light of the Climategate files, sufficient evidence exists to convict him on these grounds. There may, however, be some evidence of unethical conduct on his part if those illegally obtained files are deemed as admissible evidence in this proceeding.
When it comes our accepting his work in preference to earlier studies, I believe Dr. Mann must show beyond any reasonable doubt that his results are correct. I do not think he can do that.
Although it is right that a truly independent investigation be done, I think we here already know enough to be sure that if justice is to be done Mann and Jones and a great many others belong in jail.
Mann, that would be sweet.