From the there’s “nothing to see here and my lawyer says so too” department, we have news that Dr. Michael Mann really doesn’t want those UVA emails to get sunlight. From ATI:
‘Hockey Stick’ Creator Michael Mann Seeks Court’s Help to Ensure No Inquiry, No ‘Exoneration’
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Contact: Paul Chesser, Executive Director, paul.chesser@atinstitute.org
Dr. Michael Mann, lead author of the discredited “hockey stick” graph that was once hailed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as the “smoking gun” of the catastrophic man-made global warming theory, has asked to intervene in American Tradition Institute’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that seeks certain records produced by Mann and others while he was at the University of Virginia, for the purpose of keeping them hidden from the taxpayer.
Specifically over the weekend ATI’s Environmental Law Center received service from two Pennsylvania attorneys who seek the court’s permission to argue for Dr. Mann to intervene in ATI’s case. The attorneys also filed a motion to stay production of documents still withheld by UVA, which are to be provided to ATI’s lawyers in roughly two weeks under a protective order that UVA voluntarily agreed to in May. Dr. Mann’s lawyers also desire a hearing in mid-September, in an effort to further delay UVA’s scheduled production of records under the order.
Dr. Mann’s argument, distilled, is that the court must bend the rules to allow him to block implementation of a transparency law, so as to shield his sensibilities from offense once the taxpayer – on whose dime he subsists – sees the methods he employed to advance the global warming theory and related policies. ATI’s Environmental Law Center is not sympathetic.
“Dr. Mann’s late-hour tactics offer the spectacle of someone who relies on the media’s repeats of his untrue claims of having been ‘investigated’ and ‘exonerated’ – that is, when he’s not sputtering ad hominem and conspiracy theories to change the subject,” said Christopher Horner, director of litigation for ATI’s Environmental Law Center. “Mann has tried whatever means possible to ensure he remains free of any serious scrutiny, and this just appears to be his last gasp.”
Dr. Mann’s move is therefore gratifying, and ATI will agree to his out-of-state lawyers’ motion to appear. But ATI will ask the court to uphold Virginia’s abundantly clear law, that Dr. Mann has no interest in records that are purely the property of the taxpayer.
ATI will present to the court how Dr. Mann understood, as an unambiguous and agreed-upon condition of his employment, that he had no expectation of privacy when he used UVA’s public email system. ATI therefore looks forward to seeing if, given the opportunity, UVA will defend the idea that any of its own policies be upheld in court. Since Dr. Mann has no property interest in the taxpayer-owned records sought by ATI, he has no standing and therefore should not be entered in the case. Dr. Mann wants, after the fact, for UVA to throw out policies he accepted as a condition of living off of taxpayer dollars, in order to cover up public information and to evade scrutiny.
To the extent Dr. Mann, the university, or their obstructionist backers like Union of Concerned Scientists continue to argue he has been “cleared” or “exonerated,” or that any substantive investigation has taken place, those pleadings are undermined by their persistent efforts to squelch inquiry. As a result, all the public sees is an effort to sweep Climategate revelations under the rug in order to preserve the biggest taxpayer-financed gravy train for science and academia in decades. Hence we see the Rasmussen Reports poll last month that showed a strong majority of the public believes scientists who study climate change have falsified research data in order to support their own theories and beliefs.
“Virginia’s courts do not brook conspiracy theories as the basis for intervention in run-of-the-mill Freedom of Information Act litigation,” said Dr. David Schnare, director of ATI’s Environmental Law Center. “Dr. Mann – having failed to prevail in the court of public opinion – cannot now strut into court, soap box in hand, and expect a warm welcome.”
See case documents, press releases, media coverage, commentary, broadcast interviews, etc. pertaining to ATI v. University of Virginia by clicking here: http://bit.ly/mLZLXC
For an interview with Environmental Law Center director Dr. David Schnare or director of litigation Christopher Horner, email paul.chesser@atinstitute.org or call (202)670-2680.
Follow ATI on Twitter: http://twitter.atinstitute.org
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
More likely just another arrow in the elephant. But maybe a big one.
Hey, I win the I-told-you-so award
August 12, 2011 at 2:39 pm comment 717857
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes.
I think some people always think before they act and will always act according to an agenda, therefore I they’re mostly trying to shift focus to have people spend time on crap.
So the tit for tat answer is to just do the same. :p
So?
There is a god. !
Clearly he is just fighting for academic freedom for scientists everywhere.
He’s a hero!
I imagine that will be the spin if he is called out on this. In any case his strategy is either:
1) Idiotic – nobody this dumb should be in academia.
2) Necessary since the emails are damning
3) A safety measure since he doesn’t remember what is in the records
4) A ploy the play the victim when nothing comes up, which indicates a conniving and manipulative personality – something we already knew from the Climategate emails.
I can’t think of a valid and moral reason for him to enter the fray like this.
Obviously PR out the window…..
I don’t see any way around it.
He was an employee of the state….the law’s the law
The next few weeks are going to be very enjoyable. It is such a shame that the e-mails won’t be released in time for them to be discussed at Gore’e forthcoming climatefest.
Perhaps he shares Jones’ sentiment… once the emails are out, people will try to find problems in them. Well duh! It is hard to see how these chaps have any credibility remaining in scientific circles. It is much akin to Australia’s Prime Minister who is determined to push through a CO2 tax despite having no mandate for it at the election (quite the reverse in fact) and opinion polls at all time lows. Unfortunately desperate people are inclined to do desperate things…
This action by Mann is indicative of one thing and one thing only. He DOES have something to hide and that ‘something’ will be revealed in his e-mails.
Both Mann and the University of Virginia will most probably suffer greatly when this ‘something’ emerges, and it is entirely the fault of the University of Virginia that they have become embroiled in this mess. They tried to cover up something which they knew was wrong. How many times must people be told that it is not the original offence which causes the biggest problems, it is the attempted cover-up which causes the destruction.
I think that Mann is now in the “half-a-crown, tanner” phase of this investigation.
For those not familiar with this peculiarly English phrase allow me to elucidate. The pre-decimalisation half-a-crown coin (two shillings and sixpence) was a large coin; the tanner, a colloquialism for the sixpenny coin which was a very small coin. The “half-a-crown, tanner” simile is used to reflect the effect of nervousness upon a particularly private sphincter of the human body.
The Anthony Weiner of clinate science!
PaulH says:
September 6, 2011 at 1:18 pm
Yes! UVa admin has already spent at least $500,000 taxpayer dollars in this effort. They should all be summarily dismissed and be required to repay. Idiots and thieves, the lot of ’em.
Of course, this could easily be the other end of Climategate.
Gary Hladik says:
September 6, 2011 at 1:40 pm
So Dr. Mann is paying these lawyers out of his own pocket?
I seriously doubt it. Follow the money.
To me, if there is nothing in those emails damaging to Mann, he’d want them to be released to show he did nothing wrong. Seems to me this would be what most normal humans would do under the same circumstances (assuming no wrong-doing).
Yes, the Tim Ball case is relevant. IIRC, one of the quips he objected to was that he should be in State Penn rather than Penn State. Or SLT.
How deep does this go beyond the climate change religion? Are all grant seeking scientists any different from Dr. Mann?
What is he afraid of? Truth? Misunderstanding? Deception?
Be a Mann sir.
Not a mouse..
PaulH says: September 6, 2011 at 1:18 pm
[Perhaps we should move away from Mann and focus on his enablers within the University of Virginia.]
No, absolutely not. Doing this will ultimately prove that it is in fact all your fault, this is the path that would occur, and it is exactly what people in fear of individual responsibility always try to accomplish.
It was Manns doing it is his fault.
But, Mann is part of the department, so it is the departments fault.
But, the department is part of the university, so it is the universities fault.
But, the university receives funding and some over site from the government, so it is the governments fault.
But the government is chosen by the votes of society, so it is society fault.
And since you are part of society…
It is Your Fault.
Keep the spotlight on the PERSON that did the thing or else you will end up with a mirror in from of them that reflects to spotlight on to you while hiding them in the shadow.
PaulH says:
September 6, 2011 at 1:18 pm
I believe Steve McIntyre over a Climate Audit said recently that rather than going after the individuals in the CAGW scare, we should focus instead on the institutions and bodies that enable and protect those individuals. Perhaps we should move away from Mann and focus on his enablers within the University of Virginia.”
I don’t disagree with this as a long term move however short term putting 1 or 2 high profile heads on pikes is both far easier and far more effective.
If you start going after whole colleges on “little proof” you will cause the media to have a real story to twist, colleges will band together even some that have nothing to do with the issue because they don’t bother to review the real info instead just use the propaganda produced by the media.
You also have the problem of them using state money and dragging things outs for decades along with being able to create all kinds of excuses.
By going after a handful of “stars” you both send a msg that “yes we will come after you for “following orders””, Its also far easier and more straight forward. Much as the piece writes,
“ATI therefore looks forward to seeing if, given the opportunity, UVA will defend the idea that any of its own policies be upheld in court.”
colleges have a long history of abusive rules and regs that they know are blatantly unconstitutional on their face and they defend them to the death spending millions. It will be fun watching them try to balance how suddenly they have to choose between “we are above all laws and write our own and if you don’t like it were going to abuse you until the courts say we can’t and then even after” vs “we have to choose between our need to be gods and our need to push our agenda”.
This also will keep other colleges out because the last thing they want to push is that “we colleges aren’t above the law” motto.
Once you get a few heads then you can roll into college town and simply state “look we both know your not going to win this and this is what your going to do”. This saves the taxpayer millions if not billions and should at least get the process started of getting rid of the worst offenders.
Plus lets not forget the failure to pike hansen and other global cooling nutters has directly resulted in them being able to bring about the next cultist craze in global warming/etc.
Even if they don’t get sent to jail, discrediting them publicly will help prevent future cultist crazes from being pushed.
Mann:
Might add non-existing numbers
May ask new name
It would seem like mann-made global warming is catastrophic, after all! 😉
What is Mann thinking? From a reasonable person’s viewpoint, his actions, as well as some others related to his work, suggest a desperate attempt at a cover up.
It most certainly appears the he has gone ‘all in’ to stop something from being revealed.
Will the impact be as great as his efforts to conceal? This saga is already very interesting. I’m beginning to think the conclusion may be a block buster.
Mann wrote the emails they are trawling through. He is seeking to be represented in the discussions, which seems reasonable. They have asked for a two-week stay to let his lawyers study the material. It seems ATI has agreed, which is also reasonable. The rest is posturing.
IF Michael Mann has really been properly and fully cleared and exonerated of any and all wrongdoing with regards to his publicly funded research, then surely he has absolutely nothing whatsoever to fear from full disclosure and publication of these public property emails?
For him to act in such bad faith shows the action of a man who is desperately trying to hide something. One has to ask, what and why?
Surely if he takes the prior behaviour of his acolytes in the climate “science” community as an example, he could have been stealing phrases from Chinese fortune cookies and passing those off as computer projections, and his supporters would STILL claim that he has practising rigorous science. I am not sure at this point what Mann would have to do for his loyal and faithful followers to lose faith in him. Certainly his utter abandonment of any pretence of sticking to the scientific method has not dented their faith in him.
So what has he to fear at this point from full disclosure?
Nick Stokes says:
September 6, 2011 at 3:31 pm
================================
Thanks Nick….where there’s smoke….there’s fire
i suspect all obviously incriminating emails etc have been long purged. But there is the possibility of comparisons and replies from other sources proving that emails have indeed been deleted on a selective basis. And that could be a real problem.