While the IPCC gets taken to the woodshed, Mannian methodology gets another free pass.
Cuccinelli left Credit: TIMES-DISPATCH, Dr. Mann, right
An Albemarle County judge has dismissed Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s demand that the University of Virginia turn over documents related to the research of a prominent climate change expert.
Cuccinelli, a vocal climate change skeptic, had been investigating the possibility that climatology professor Michael Mann fraudulently obtained five taxpayer-funded research grants while employed at UVa between 1999 and 2005.
In an opinion issued this morning, Judge Paul M. Peatross Jr. ruled that Cuccinelli failed to show a sufficient “reason to believe” that UVa possessed any documents related to Mann that suggested a fraud occurred.
…
Peatross added, however, that the attorney general is within his rights to issue CIDs — which carry the legal weight of subpoenas — to investigate taxpayer-funded research grants awarded to professors such as Mann.
Cuccinelli said in a statement that he will send a new CID to UVa to continue his hunt for proof that Mann defrauded Virginia’s taxpayers in obtaining grants that funded his climate change research.
More here at The Daily Progress (not to be confused with the ‘angry progress’ blogs)
h/t to WUWT reader AnonyMoose
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It is quite possible that Cuccinelli would not have found evidence of fraud . After all , it was an investigation , not an indictment . I’m not really sure what an insufficient “reason to believe” that UVA held any incriminating documents means . Fortunately , the ruling allows Cuccinelli to reissue the CID . Personally , I think UVA is stonewalling and trying to hide behind “academic freedom”.
paulw says: August 30, 2010 at 1:39 pm
“This [sic] are aggressive and shameful actions by Cuccinelli. Dr Mann was found to have done his job properly. Instead of letting it go, this polarizes the debate. As if the goal is to silence scientists and bring fear.”
Paul, if you’ve read the Climategate papers, you’d know that silencing scientists and bringing fear is what AGW science is all about.
This is called being “home towned”.
Folks who live near (and maybe work at) a long-established
institution of higher education are usually aware of how the
local courts tend to favor the educational institution in the
first round of rulings.
The locals might get something done on appeal, if they want
to continue the fight against a bank of institutional attorneys.
In this case the local judge accomodated the University of
Virginia, knowing the Attorney General wasn’t going to walk
away.
The Attorney General got a ruling on having the right to
issue the CID’s… as detailed in Virginia law. The UVa put
up a vigorous fight to strike down that limited-instance
(in cases of possible fraud) right.
#
#
paulw says:
August 30, 2010 at 1:39 pm
This are aggressive and shameful actions by Cuccinelli. Dr Mann was found to have done his job properly. Instead of letting it go, this polarizes the debate. As if the goal is to silence scientists and bring fear.
____________________________________________
What is the matter Paul, afraid they may audit you and find out about all that iffy stuff and you will have to give back all the grant money???
As a tax payer AND as a chemist I am very happy to see Cuccinelli putting some fear into scientists – they need it given the amount of lying I have seen while working as a chemist and lab manager.
Why is it that people think a PhD automatically means the guy is honest?
—————–
Snapple,
I am sure your thought processes leading to arguments like “stooge of the fossil fuel industry” are common and valid in certain climate science consensus circles and on the Oprah Winfrey show, but in a court of law those arguments probably will lead to the extreme displeasure of the court. But, keep on trying that failed ad hominem technique; it seems to help the skeptics win more public confidence with your every attempt to use it. : )
John
And exactly how would the Judge know there was no fraud if he won’t let anyone see the emails that would prove the fraud? The standard is probable cause, and it is an easy one to meet.
In the general search for truth, I guess that this teaches us that climatologist mannufacture rewards for climatologists (in the form of grants), and lawyers manufacture rewards for lawyers (in the form of meandering legal proceedings).
I suspect this has more to do with politics and getting votes then anything else. The problem, while everyone is talking about Mr. Mann, the university is ultimately responsible. It is the university’s reputation and management that stand to loose the most. The other side effect is taking attention away from the issue of scientific competence and shifting it to “possible financial misconduct”. Now if the university is maleficent, that should be what the issue is. If Mann is incompetent or in other ways less then honorable in his research, reporting and or teaching, then go after that. As I see this from here in Calgary, it is a no win for anyone, as it is presently presented.
In the article Mann talks like it’s over. But Cuccinelli is “issuing a new civil investigative demand”.
I think Mann is a scoundrel but am relieved this is not going through. Those who, as I do, remember Congressman Dingell’s efforts to bring scientists to account in the ‘eighties will recall how futile his efforts were and how they came to be seen as hounding innocent eggheads. Scientists should do their own policing, and do it well. This is what this website is about.
mpaul ,
Thanks mpaul. It does look like Michael Mann and UV are getting backed into a corner. UV may at some point look at Michael Mann as a liability. If that point does come they could easily claim ignorance to what Mann was doing and distance themselves from him. They could say they didn’t understand the nuance of the science and so make themselves innocent of any wrong doing. If that point is reached Michael Mann will be left to face it alone. I wonder if he’s thought about that and made a plan B for it?
Would anyone like to trade places with Michael Mann?
Snapple,
Are you an environmental activist?
Pat commented:
“And exactly how would the Judge know there was no fraud if he won’t let anyone see the emails that would prove the fraud? The standard is probable cause, and it is an easy one to meet.”
Evidently, Mr. Cuccinelli failed to meet the probable cause standard. If the standard is easy, and the argument still cannot meet it, what does that tell you?
Oh, silly me. This is WUWT. The obvious conclusion (here) is that the judge must be part of the conspiracy. Thus the “home town” comment. Cuccinelli’s case is fine; the judge simply ignored that and found for his friends.
REPLY: No the logical conclusion is that if there’s nothing to hide, release it, clear the air. And I don’t appreciate your illogical conclusion about WUWT. – Anthony
Snapple says:
August 30, 2010 at 2:29 pm
….I think Cuccinelli is a stooge of the fossil fuel industry.
_______________________________________________________
Snapple, you have it donkey backwards. MANN is the stooge of the fossil fuel industry.
TheClimategate e-mail on Global Governance & Sustainable Development (B1) – Ged Davis is the key. Here is who Ged Davis is. A thirty year Shell Oil executive with UN and IPCC connections!!!!!
Here is the context and history:
In Maurice Strong’s 1972 First Earth Summit speech, Strong warned urgently about global warming he saw to it that Greenpeace got a free pass to the summit. Strong is a trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation (Standard Oil money) that funds Greenpeace and WWF. Strong started in the oil business in 1952 working for the Rockefeller’s in Saudi Arabia and went on to be president and CEO of several oil companies.
Here is the WHY of “Global Warming”:
Obama’s Chief Science Adviser is John Holden.’In their 1973 book “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions,” Holdren and co-authors Paul and Anne Ehrlich wrote:
“A massive campaign [read global warming] must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States. De-devolopment means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation. Resources and energy must be diverted from frivolous and wasteful uses in overdeveloped countries to filling the genuine needs of underdeveloped countries.”
And Strong is again very active in the campaign for Global Governance:
UN REFORM – Restructuring for Global Governance
Our Global Neighborhood – Report of the Commission on Global Governance: a summary analysis
The de-development plan is UN Division for Sustainable Development – full text of Agenda 21
Maurice Strong
David Rockefeller Studies Program – Global Governance & Climate Change
Council on Foreign Relations web site, David Rockefeller Honorary Chairman – Global Governance
David Rockefeller quotes on global governance
At Baden-Baden , Germany , in June 1991 , David Rockefeller stated :
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during these years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government which will never again know war, but only peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in the past centuries.” http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8450
Snapple, are you sure you want a world ruled by Oil Execs and Banksters????
Is there a pattern here? Climate things that Mann touched do seem to be often investigated. I don’t think you can blame that possible pattern on Cuccinelli.
John
Snapple,
Instead of engaging in ad hominem slanders, why don’t you explain for us why UVA promptly released the emails of climate scientist Patrick Michaels when requested by a private “environmental” organization, but is into a hard stonewall mode on the emails of Michael Mann, whose POLICY of using cherry-picked data and improper statistical methods are a blatent violation of the Scientific Method?
———————-
Amino Acids in Meteorites,
I am not a lawyer and have no legal training, but I think the CID served on UVa was mishandled by UVa lawyers. They blew an opportunity that Cuccinelli offered them to drop the formal CID and do an informal showing. In that case it there would be no publicity involved at that step. If there was some finding then UVa would be in a position to deal with Cuccinelli sans the publicity to minimize the amount of legal liability. After all, Cuccinelli is not per se looking at the UVa. They were Mann’s employers so they are could be only incidentally involved.
John
During the 1980s, the Soviet state security, the KGB, orchestrated the infamous “AIDS made in America” campaign of defamation against American scientists. In 1987, the famous Soviet physicist Roald Sagdeev, who recently criticized Attorney General Cuccinelli’s persecution of climate scientist Michael Mann, publically denounced the pseudoscientific AIDS conspiracy theory. This may have happened because President Ronald Reagan’s Secretary of State, George Shultz, told the Russians to stop spreading disinformation about how our scientists made AIDS.
Unlike Virginia’s Attorney General Cuccinelli, America’s Secretary of State Shultz, a Republican, defended America’s scientists from those who would defame them and smear them in front of the whole world. Mr. Schultz appreciated how important American science is for the progress of the entire world.
Cuccinelli calls himself a “conservative,” but there is nothing conservative about destroying American scientists and discrediting their research research with fabricated “fraud” charges. There is nothing conservative about risking the future of our nation and the whole world.
Mr. Cuccinelli should follow the lead of the American statesman George Shultz, instead of toadying to the destructive sponsors of the pseudoscientific denialist movement. He should be defending scientists from persecution, not setting the mob on them at taxpayer expense.
In his error-filled July 13, 2010 court filing requesting documents from the University of Virginia related to climate scientist Michael Mann, Attorney General Cucccinelli is spouting Pravda’s canards about the supposedly greedy, dishonest climate scientists who allegedly misled people about global warming.
http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/110832-0/
http://english.pravda.ru/world/europe/111117-0/
Two months before Copenhagen, [Russia’s] state-owned Channel One television aired a documentary called The History of a Deception: Global Warming, which argued that the notion of man-made climate change was the result of an international media conspiracy. A month later, hackers sparked the so-called Climategate scandal by stealing e-mails from European climate researchers.
PS–There are so many conspiracies Cuccinelli could investigate. For example, where are the aliens at Area 51?
Dave says:
August 30, 2010 at 4:01 pm
Wow. You seem to see people claiming conspiracies all over
the place. A “home town” ruling just means the judge had the
latitude to give the local folks a break and make the outsider
(the AG) cross all the t’s and dot all the i’s.
There’s nothing conspiratorial about this ruling from national,
international, or transnational interests. It’s about a state law
being applied in a very limited circumstance concerning an
institution of higher education that’s not a direct party to an inquiry
about possible fradulent accounting in grant reporting.
The AG’s legal brief is available on line.
Climategate is probably a Russian operation. They call it kompromat.
Newsweek (8-2-10) observes:
Two months before Copenhagen, [Russia’s] state-owned Channel One television aired a documentary called The History of a Deception: Global Warming, which argued that the notion of man-made climate change was the result of an international media conspiracy. A month later, hackers sparked the so-called Climategate scandal by stealing e-mails from European climate researchers. The hacked e-mails, which were then used to support the arguments of global-warming skeptics, appeared to have been distributed through a server in the Siberian oil town of Tomsk.
REPLY: No the logical conclusion is that if there’s nothing to hide, release it, clear the air.
That’s exactly what got Nixon in so much extended hot water.
Watching Attn. Gen John Mitchell’s stonewalling face spout one 5th after another really cheesed America off.
The taste of things hidden is fresh in the mouth.
In his famous 1956 “Secret Speech” to the 20th Party Conference, Nikita Khrushchev stated:
Let us…recall the “affair of the doctor-plotters [who were falsely accused of taking money from the U.S. government to poison Soviet leaders].”
(Animation in the hall.)
Actually there was no “affair” outside of the declaration of the woman doctor [Lidiya] Timashuk [more here], who was probably influenced or ordered by someone (after all, she was an unofficial collaborator of the organs of state security) to write Stalin a letter in which she declared that doctors were applying supposedly improper methods of medical treatment.
Russia’s President Medvedev recently stated that global warming is happening. RIA Novosti (7-31-10) reports that President Medvedev stated:
“What is happening to our planet’s climate should motivate all of us, I mean, states and heads of non-governmental organizations, to take more active steps to resist global warming.”
This affirmation of global warming is an about-face for President Medvedev. As noted above, when he visited Tomsk two months after the Copenhagen Climate Conference, President Medvedev characterized the global-warming debate as “some kind of tricky campaign made up by some commercial structures to promote their business projects.”
It should be pretty obvious that President Medvedev’s former views are shared by U.S. and British global warming denialists.
1. Cuccinelli inaccurately asserts that the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age “disappeared” in Mann et al.’s original hockey stick paper.
2. Cuccinelli misrepresents the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
3. Cuccinelli falsely maintains that climate scientists are primarily motivated by money, and suggests they are skewing their research results to attract grants.
4. Cuccinelli exaggerates the importance of the hockey stick, implying that it provides the rationale for laws that would require emissions reductions.
5. Cuccinelli cites a paper that criticized the hockey stick, but fails to cite refutations of that paper’s conclusions or the unusual circumstances under which it was published.
6. Cuccinelli uncritically cites a study by Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick that erroneously criticized Mann et al.’s hockey stick research.
7. Cuccinelli implies Mann was hiding something in a data folder marked “CENSORED,” but fails to acknowledge that the folder was publicly available.
8.Cuccinelli extensively cites the 2006 Wegman report, but fails to note valid criticisms of that report.
9. Cuccinelli incorrectly cites three emails that were stolen last fall from Mann.
10. Cuccinelli and his staff again make a basic mistake when describing the now well-known email that features the phrases “trick” and “hide the decline.”
11. Cuccinelli confuses the Muir Russell report’s criticism of a Phil Jones graph with Mann et al.’s hockey stick research.
12. Cuccinelli’s filing demonstrates a lack of understanding of how science works.
http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/cuccinelli-court-filing-basic-errors-0430.html#3