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
Perhaps by “Academic Freedom” they mean “Academic License”.
I keep hearing variations of this “I don’t like Cuccinelli’s actions because they’re political”. Quite frankly, it annoys the hell out of me.
I suppose we all hated Ken Starr too, but the problem isn’t what HE did. The problem was that a sitting president lied under oath and forced the opposition to call him on it. And for the record, the compliant media failed to accurately report that clinton WAS IMPEACHED. He simply chose to ignore it. And don’t kid yourself, that was the recommended action by a team of legal advisors.
There’s the problem, with both that situation and the FOI situations we’re seeing regarding AGW. Because the media has chosen sides, these people can continue to simply ignore things and they will magically disappear.
A truly free society can not tolerate this crap. It HAS to be dragged into the light of publicity. I can assure you that more people know that Miley Cyrus’s wallet and credit cards were stolen this week than have ever heard Cuccinelli’s name.
The reason Cuccinelli has had to go the criminal charges route:
“The knowledge that one is to be hanged in a fortnight wonderfully concentrates the mind.”
The lack of consequences for research and academic shenanigans has been responsible for all sorts of hanky-panky. Reminding FOIA-evaders and their ilk that words and actions have consequences, real, punitive consequences, seems called for.
I know Steve McIntyre and others have taken a dim view of Cuccinelli’s actions – arguing that this should not be dragged into the arena of a court of law.
But I think this latest episode shows that the corruption of government money has no alternative. Were it private money, the funder would have a direct say in how it was spent and own the results. With government, there is no “private”. It is our money. And sadly, once you get addicted to the government money, there is no quick cure. The only solution is for tough love which is what Cuccinelli is doing.
Until these charlatans calling themselves scientists understand that there are reprecussions to anything done for financial gain, the whole arena of science will continue to be tainted by shoddy work, and outright fraud. The solution is to put some accountability into the doling out of the money. And that is what Cuccinelli is doing. Instead of being an exception, he should be the rule for the rest of the AGs in every state.
I’m guessing things like this are one of the reasons Tony Blair said FOI laws were one of his greatest regrets :p.
I find it hard to interpret these sentiments, other than to assume that FOI laws means each Government department has to implement some labyrinthine work-around to avoid it. At least Blair gave us a 6 month limitation; they can stall!
Sorry, if a scientist takes government money (my money) and totally fabricates a study in order to suck in more government money (again, my money) to fight a fiction created by his study, then he’s at least as culpable as someone who holds me up in the street and demands money (my money.)
Those of you who think science, and scientists, should be immune from prosecution, and incarceration, for stealing my money, would you also let the thief on the street go free?
This is about intent. If the intent was to defraud, and I honestly believe that is exactly what the intent was, then this has left the realm of legitimate science and entered the realm of outright fraud. If the correspondence and written records don’t show that intent, fine. But if they don’t, why spend so much money (again, more of our money) to hide them, deny they exist, etc.
The world is filled with fraudsters. They all belong in jail. And I don’t care how many honors, titles, and science awards they’ve acquired along the way. The way to stop fraudulent behavior is to prosecute it. Anyone who says otherwise just encourages fraudulent behavior, and frankly, we’ve had more than enough of it lately. If the university officials are guilty of a cover-up, toss them in jail for a time also. Enough nonsense. What ever happened to the rule of law in this country? (Yes, I know the answer to that one, but it’s way, way OT.)
Thomas Jefferson, on his tombstone did not want to be remembered as president of the United States. Instead he wanted it engraved that he was author of the Declaration of Independence and founder of the University of Virginia. I wonder what he might think about his creation stone-walling on FOIA requests. There’s no way to know what this man for whom ‘nature intended…the tranquil pursuits of science by rendering them my supreme delight’ would view AGW. But he also wrote that eternal vigilence is the price of liberty. The AGW scam is the antithesis to liberty: to low cost & easy travel, to absence of worries of want, to a betterment in our (brief) lives. And in his first inaurgaral Jefferson advocated a government that would, ‘not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned’. The AGW activists intend to do all that and more. I say, investigate their ‘science’.
I suspect will try to brush this aside arguing that the records are the subject of a current legal dispute and that this dispute needs to be resolved first. They will most likely argue that § 2.2-3705.3. “Exclusions to application of chapter; records relating to administrative investigations” would apply if UVa were to lose its appeal.
Robinson says:
January 6, 2011 at 5:06 am
Here’s your dumb question of the day:
==============================
Obstruction
Perjury
felony
jail time
plenty more
In previous WUWT postings, it has been argued that academic freedom of expression will be hampered by the use of law to investigate possible errors of understanding or judgement, as science and truth are advanced through a process of trial and error that require scientists to be unafraid of making mistakes. This makes good sense. Yet by West Virginia releasing information about Michaels under an FOI request, but not that of Mann, West Virginia has shown that the privacy around an individual’s work is a privelege, not a right, and one held by the University, not the individual. The “right” to academic freedom of opinion touted by the University as being under threat does not exist (at least at West Virginia) by its own actions.
As for what is being hidden, the case reads like the “the lady doeth protest too much” story, especially on Mann’s side. If Mann had nothing embarassing, he might have said for the University to release whatever they wanted. He knows he his under review. But perhaps I read human nature wrong, perhaps at this stage of Us vs Them, both the University and Mann like their roles as David against the State Goliath.
Exactly . . he claims to be weary of his work being picked to pieces by the skeptics . . if there are no holes, no peel factor, so what?
He needs to man up . . ( yes I know )
I can support an FOIA request.
@Robuk says:
“Is there not a time stamp on computer files that will show when they were last altered”
————————————————————————–
Not a problem, anyone can alter the time stamp of a file
don’t for one minute think that what UV is doing is not what every other university hooked up to the AGW funding tree wouldn’t do: increasingly academia has worried less about the substantive content of any published research than the fact that (a) it is published (b) promoted in the media as favourable PR for the institution and (c) perpetuates funding. Look at the UEA defense of CRU after Climategate. It is only when alumni (and their ongoing contributions to funding) are upset that university administrations begin to respond. As government funding for climate change collapses post Copenhagen, Cancun and Climategate, so inexorably will the support of academic institutions.
I sincerly hope that US population keeps up the fight.
As far as I can detirmine, Germany and the UK are lost to the warmists. Germany has passed laws requiring energy company’s to monitor citizens energy use.
The UK is blasting it’s budgets into oblivion with wind turbines and spending decisions based on dodgy Met Office info.
Australia is inches away from introducing a carbon tax. We’ve had desal plants costing truckloads based on alarmists predictions of running out of water. (Dunno if you noticed, we’ve just had a lake form the size of France and Germany combined)
It seems the USA is last bastion where reason can prevail (As usual), the EPA is a worry though, and you can’t, MUSTN’T let ’em get a foothold or the planet will be in serious trouble, For Real though.
It will be fascinating to see what eminates out of the FOI requests into Uni Va.
CodeTech says:
January 6, 2011 at 8:02 am
I keep hearing variations of this “I don’t like Cuccinelli’s actions because they’re political”. Quite frankly, it annoys the hell out of me.
========================================================
I can only echo those sentiments. If demanding transparency and academic integrity, (especially when using public funds) is political, then count me as a political polemicist. Of course its political! This whole damned generation of catastrophic climate contrivances has been political. This isn’t some congenial open and honest discussion by well-meaning individuals with differences of opinion. These are genuinely dishonest, misleading, power usurpers.
They place the desires of the collective over the needs of the individual. They seek to destroy representative democracy and replace it with a totalitarian bureaucracy. They have manipulated our market systems, openly attacked capitalism and admittedly and unabashedly stated they sought to redistribute the worlds wealth. They have sought to replace traditional religious beliefs with their own form of theology.
Anyone who ever thought this wasn’t a political contest needs their own reality check. The above paragraph is all verifiable and true. LOOK UP THE WORDS THAT MEET THE DEFINITION!
I posted these quotes on Goddard’s site yesterday. They are apt today. This is what the “father of our country” had to say about these people.
“Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”
and
“There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.”
and
“Egalitarians(read modern day “progressives”) create the most dangerous inequality of all — inequality of power. Allowing politicians to determine what all other human beings will be allowed to earn is one of the most reckless gambles imaginable. Like the income tax, it may start off being applied only to the rich but it will inevitably reach us all.” — George Washington
Here is what a more recent person of great intellect had to say.
There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always—do not forget this, Winston—always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—forever.
—Part III, Chapter III, Nineteen Eighty-Four– G. Orwell
Political? No, kidding. It always was.
I agree with you 100% . . more if i could.
Joking aside, if the university gets away with this there are 93 third world “governments ” who will point to this and say “see we aren’t so bad”.
America owes itself to be better than that.
@Robinson says:
January 6, 2011 at 8:26 am
I’m guessing things like this are one of the reasons Tony Blair said FOI laws were one of his greatest regrets :p.
———————————————————————–
Another quote from the text and very OT imho:
“As I said information is power and any government’s attitude about sharing information with the people actually says a great deal about how it views power itself and how it views the relationship between itself and the people who elected it.”
http://www.cfoi.org.uk/blairawards.html
You can see the “dog ate my hard drive” defence coming a mile away on this one. I hope enrolment at this “institute of higher learning” drops by 50% as a result of this. I can assure I would never send one of my kids to a school with academic and moral standards this low.
Opinion not facts follow:
This no longer about money for universities. They have now painted themselves into a corner by so blindly supporting the global warming idea. If they produce the said data and it shows fraud or deceit, then they will lose standing in society. It would be “catastropohic” for the “academic elite” to have have to admit they completely fell for a scam and would knock them off their pedestal. A pedestal they spent decades building the illusion of. It would completely undermine their position of saying “I’m an expert, so you must listen to only me”.
They are not stupid. They know full well, looking in hindsight, that they should have been tempering their support with statements of uncertainty to cover their A**. But they didn’t and they only dug the hole deeper by becoming even more defensive every time any questions came up about uncertainties. It is their own fault. This was just an idealogical opportunity that was just too good to pass up for them. Their arrogance made them unable to admit even for a second that they might be wrong. They insulted and called anyone who questioned them stupid.
So what else can they do now? If they start to admit they might have jumped before they looked, then they lose their carefully crafted position of academic authority. So they will continue to use every single trick they can think of to try and head off discovery.
I personally find it worse to knowingly perpetuate a lie or deceit, than to make a mistake. All they are doing is making sure they fall that much harder when it happens.
This is a shame cause they are taking universities and science down with their egos. But given the egos shown by some statements, I would guess they feel that they are more important than the university or science anyway.
People who have admitted they got ahead of their knowlege, have far more of my respect than people who just keep shouting “don’t you know who I am”.
“What is the penalty if they don’t deliver? ”
===========================
The Democrats control the State Senate, but the Republicans control the State House. The Governor is a Republican, too.
It would be extremely easy to strip certain research funds out of the state’s U of VA appropriations bill, and reduce the funding of the University’s administration budget as well.
“I don’t like Cuccinelli’s actions because they’re political”.
================================================
Complete total horse poop……………
The university made it political….
….If there was any way they could spin it, they would have been shouting it from the roof tops.
Is there anyone stupid enough to think that the university is not releasing the information because it proves their case…………………
What’s more important to the MET, proselytizing for AGW or public safety?
@Nick, you would not be thinking of my good friend and compadre Barrie Harrop would you? He has suddenly gone awol from the comments sections of the wsj. I hope he didn’t overdo it in his much touted whine cellar. For those who are interested you can look up “Barrie Harrop” and “Harrop” in the urban dictionary.
Let me see if I got this right:
We are concerned that the UV might fabricate data and studies about the Hockey Stick, which – given the admission by all (including Mann) that the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warming Period indeed existed – could only have come from fabricated or wacky data and studies to begin with?
They’re going to have to fabricate the fabricated data. This may become a new branch of science altogether.
In the end, even if they correct time stamps and manufacture whatever, the science has to work and be reproducible.
It can’t.
Did Michael Mann fulfill the written requirements of the contracts he signed with the University of Virginia?
That is the only question which has any possible relevance to the Attorney General’s investigation.
For anyone wanting to follow Ken Cuccinelli’s fascinating battles with Virginia University, this is a site worth a visit every week or two:
http://vaquitamlaw.com/