Long time WUWT readers may remember that a defender of “the cause”, Professor Scott Mandia, donned a Halloween costume and professed his love of defending Michael Mann and others who have had to suffer the terrible, terrible, tragedy of people asking Climategate related questions about validity of science, peer review gatekeeping, and funding.
Mike likes the idea:
He is the founder and operator of the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund, an organization that was started in 2011, mainly as a response to Climategate. From their web page:
CSLDF was started when Scott Mandia posted a “Dear Colleagues” letter on his blog in September 2011. He wrote, “Climate researchers are in need of immediate legal assistance to prevent their private correspondence from being exposed” via misuse of open records laws. The outpouring of support was overwhelming, and helped pay for climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann’s legal defense against a massive and invasive records request. But scientists’ legal bills continued to mount, and Scott Mandia paired with Joshua Wolfe to create CSLDF. Source: http://climatesciencedefensefund.org/about-us/
The reason I thought to ask this was because the recent Shukla debacle was highlighted by Representative Lamar Smith in his preservation letter as:
“IGES appears to be almost fully funded by taxpayer money while simultaneously participating in partisan political activity by requesting a RICO investigation of companies and organizations that disagree with the Obama administration on climate change.
I recalled a comment made at Scott Mandia’s blog by the professor himself that stuck with me all these years. Given the RICO20 and Shukla mess, I thought it worth mentioning again. Here it is (highlight mine):
It seems to me that second “settled fact” might very well become unsettled as the Shukla Congressional investigation saga unravels. And with all that NSF largess in Shukla’s hands, and with the RICO20 letter he spearheaded looking to investigate climate skeptics, I naturally wondered if Shukla had given Mandia’s Climate Science Legal Defense Fund some money. It seemed like a valid question to ask.
Later in the Twitter thread, after Mandia threw out the Lewandowsky style “conspiracy” grenade, I asked again:
The last two questions were over a space of about 40 minutes, so it seems like he doesn’t wish to answer whether the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund has been the recipient of any money from Shukla and/or his IGES/COLA enterprise.
Now in fairness, he may just be pissed off that I asked such a question, and there may be nothing there at all. But I have to wonder why he wouldn’t at least address the question, because to not do so only invites more questions IMHO. It’s a curiosity.
If professor Mandia does respond here, I’ll elevate his comments to the body of the post to clear up any and all questions. I just checked Twitter feed again (now 4 hours later) and still no response.