An End to Climategate? Penn State Clears Michael Mann

Prof. Michael Mann

/ Penn State University

An internal investigation at Penn State University has cleared meteorology professor Michael Mann of all "climate gate" charges, in which Mann stood accused (both formally and in the blogosphere) of research fraud.

The review cleared Mann of charges that he falsified climate change data, manipulated that data, improperly refused to share his research data and--generally behaved badly by trying to discredit other researchers' work. The panel mildly rebuked Mann for not getting express consent from various researchers before sharing their work -- but that was it.

Why is this important? You'd have to recall the major furor that arose from the climategate controversy from last December -- specifically how a handful of emails from one university became proof, in the eyes of climate change doubters, that the global fraud they long suspected been laid bare.

To review:

Last November someone hacked thousands of climate related emails from the servers at the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, one of the world's leading proponents of the notion that global warming is happening and is man made. Several of the emails, some going back more than 10 years, revealed the head of CRU, Dr Phil Jones, scheming with others how to criticize and marginalize those scientists who disagreed with the CRU's conclusions.

The most infamous email praises Penn State's Michael Mann of using a research "trick" to "hide the decline." What's that? Basically, scientists who used centuries worth of tree ring data to establish the baseline of global temps in the 20th century, could never explain why those same tree rings started showing a decline in global temps roughly after 1960.

Tree data showing global temps going down didn't mesh with actual recorded temperatures, so pains were taken, (most of the time disclosed, but sometimes not) to use actual temp recordings and "hide the decline" from trees. Sometimes, on the so called hockey stick charts that show global temps as a flat line and then a sharp upward spike are indeed mixing tree ring data and actual temps. Earlier this year the Penn State investigators, like most mainstream scientists, dismissed this part of the fraud charge, finding no "fraud' in the use of actual temp data -- the spiking part of the hockey stick -- which on its own is not in dispute.

You could call this an inside job, of course, and many will, but when a university formally investigates one of its own scientists for fraud, AND releases the report, that's serious. Click here for the link and you can judge for yourself.

But for Michael Mann, who was the subject of a hilarious and scathing You Tube spoof on "hide the decline," being cleared of research fraud is the sign of good day.

Not to mention -- so much for climategate.

---

Wyatt Andrews is a CBS News correspondent.

[bigsk8fan]

why do republicans hate science and scientists so much? perhaps it is the same reason that republicans hate it when people begin to think!

[RobAla]

I don't care what Penn State does. I care about all sides of the debate in climate change being openly aired and respected. Until recently, this has not been the case. It is up to the people of Pennsylvania as to the Penn State matter.

[jeremygiels]

This "sandal" is part of a pogrom that was designed to discredit climate change science by vested interest sectors (namely the fossil fuel industry). This special interest group is spending millions of dollars to fund "independent" public "fronts" to bring forth so-called questionable data and stories to counter the sound science and the urgent need to curtail our use of oil and coal.
Unfortunately, they have been wildly successful and the damage has been done to the great harm of our ecosystems.
Even if we were to stop adding carbon to our planet's air today, the warming will continue because of the inertia of the system.
According to top scientists we still have time to curtail dangerous warming if we act now.
The problem with this story, the media broke the news and put those in the spotlight as "guilty" as charged. This follow up story will have no near the press coverage as when it first appeared. The public's mind will be set to believe the charges!
Why was there not an investagation of those who stole the emails and their motives? That was illegal and unethical and at the moment the Copenhagen Climate Conference was about to start.
Smells fishy to me...doesn't it to you?

[endurorob_5]

So here is the problem. When tree ring data didn't mesh with actual temps then they use actual temps. The problem with that is that they depend on tree ring data when they know it can be incorrect. Using this data to establish a baseline is a bit silly. For some reason those who depend on tree ring data seam to think the only thing that effects tree growth is tempurature. Any studies that use tree ring data are very unreliable. But hey, it supports the liberal agenda that climate change is totally man made.

[user000049586849302948602]

Okay, corporate stooge. Their is a wide consensus among the scientific community (where, as demonstrated by this story, if you falsify one stitch of research, you're through and your integrity is your bread and butter) that global warming is real, is caused by man's activities and could potential have devastating consequences.

[dragontek]

Its good to see Media dimwits such as CBS and others have the tiny bit of courage by retracting their allegations against Dr. Mann.

The Media has shamelessly catered to vocal loud minorities with extremist views like the Tea Party- and on Climate Science has allowed a group of Deniers a full forum to spread misinformation that the credible scientific community says is not correct.

I guess CBS and other media conglomerates do not want their sponsors to pull out- so they align themselves with a fringe element that deny that increasing C02 and other gases pose a significant threat to us in the near, not distant future.

Perhaps CBS and others will begin to tell the public the latest information regarding climate change--like how CO2 will soon reach 400ppm- which in recent past geologic history means temperatures year round in the arctic will equal 0 degree Celsius year round - which means ice will accelerate in melting ice- or does CBS make more money and printing trash like climate gate-which thus far has proven to be false.

[alphaa10000]

UNLIKE GLOBAL WARMING, "CLIMATEGATE" IS A MYTH

CBS reports, "An internal investigation at Penn State University has cleared meteorology professor Michael Mann of all "climategate" charges -- specifically how a handful of emails from one university became proof, in the eyes of climate change doubters, that the global fraud they long suspected been laid bare..."
---

This report details an attempt to smear responsible scientists of climatology around the world.

As many already know, the GOP and its various spokesmen for the past four years have questioned not only the validity of science but the integrity of scientific researchers in the global community of climate research.

George W. Bush appointed a non-scientist "minder" to silence all public statements recognizing global warming by government scientists, including NASA's James Hansen.

So pervasive was the GOP counter-campaign, it neutered and canceled even a planned Smithsonian exhibit on global warming around the world.

GOP affiliates are on record claiming global warming is a myth, as though they did the research and had the data. While the conspiracy theories had their variations, a common theme was implacable opposition to environmental scientists for daring to bring up an Inconvenient Truth.

But theirs was more than resistance to alarming new information. The object of GOP denial is to spare its oil, gas and coal extraction industry patrons of not merely the cost of cleaning up the mess they now make with abandon, but the cost of preventing it.

After four years, the GOP rationale against global warming remains hasty, ad hoc, desperate and little but childish, based on "backward reasoning". To wit:

1. If global warming is true, then remediation would be justified-- even if remediation brings significant cost to fossil fuel-driven and extractive industries like oil, coal and gas.

2. But since said industries do not like to clean up after themselves and protect the environment, or pay for remediation measures, the GOP cannot acknowledge global warming is valid science, and still keep industry patronage. The GOP must choose between truth, and filling its campaign chest.

3. The GOP took the money, instead of truth. Obviously, the sensibilities (and contributions to the GOP) of its corporate patrons must be respected.

4. In fact, not only respected, but global warming claims must be attacked by all means as "untruth"-- even impugning the integrity of scientific professionals.

The GOP long has been a community of political Luddites in fear of the future, and making every effort at reactive protection of the status quo. Using corporate money to concentrate its political power, the GOP at one point dominated all three branches of the federal government.

While in power, the GOP brought a plague of crises to the country through eight years of self-serving neglect and DEregulation, all in service to corporate America.

[Northern_Trick]

What a farce! If this guy is innocent, then the moon really is made of green cheese.

[alphaa10000]

MORE GOP MYTHOLOGY

Northern_Trick said, "What a farce! If this guy is innocent, then the moon really is made of green cheese."
---

The only farce came from GOP bozos and their Limbaugh-League talking heads, like conspiracy specialist and oxycontin-fortified law-and-order advocate Rush "I Hope He Fails" Limbaugh.

Since Mann was cleared of bogus charges, the GOP and its bozos are green with envy. For them, envy is the only green thinking they can manage.

[doenload1]

@alphaa10000: Or, consider this: AGW is a huge distraction from real environmental concerns like toxic pollution and agriculture. Hence skeptics are more concerned about the environment than those who are willing to subordinate the truth for the "cause". AGW people are very very angry if you point out evidence that human CO2 isn't killing the planet because they want there to be a crisis!!

All I hear from AGW people are A) an appeal to authority as scientific evidence. B) Insults for anyone who disagrees. C) Bringing in all sorts of unrelated things like evolution theory or the tobacco-ill health link.

You've got nothing. AGW is cover for population reduction. Accept that you've been fooled. Au useful idiot.

[r-u-effin-serious]

No one has responded to my query: Do you truly believe there is no consequence to changing the concentrations of gases in our atmosphere. Do you truly think that unnaturally pumping out a gas that is proven to warm the atmosphere, into the atmosphere, at ever increasing rates for hundreds of years will have absolutely no effect? Truly?

[doenload1]

ru-effin-serious, First of all put it into perspective: the most significant greenhouse gas is water vapour. The second most significant greenhouse agent is clouds. Humans can't control these because most water evaporates from the ocean.

Next, please consider that CO2 is very soluble in water. This means that any excess CO2 in the air is absorbed into the oceans, so it is arguable that we are in control of CO2 content of air with our modest contribution.

If you consider that there are <a href="http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/CarbonFooledYa/121_Large.jpg">750 billion tonnes</a> of carbon in the air and 40,000 billion tonnes of carbon in the ocean you can see that A) our emissions at 8 billion tonnes/yr are small in comparison to the ocean store and B) a <a href="http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/CarbonFooledYa/7oobillion.jpg">small</a> change in the ocean content can result in a large change in content in the air. The ice cores show this happening with warmer periods causing higher atmospheric CO2 with a time lag of <a href="http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/CarbonFooledYa/co2-400k-years.gif">800 years</a>.

Face it: in AGW you've been sold a lemon.

[doenload1]

Apologies for the hyperlinks that don't work. That last paragraph again:

If you consider that there are 750 billion tonnes of carbon in the air and 40,000 billion tonnes of carbon in the ocean you can see that A) our emissions at 8 billion tonnes/yr are small in comparison to the ocean store and B) a small change in the ocean content can result in a large change in content in the air. The ice cores show this happening with warmer periods causing higher atmospheric CO2 with a time lag of 800 years.

http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/CarbonFooledYa/121_Large.jpg

http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/CarbonFooledYa/7oobillion.jpg

http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/CarbonFooledYa/co2-400k-years.gif

[Bunch1243]

There is so much wrong with Mann's Hockey Stick Graph that it is just implausible that a University of any kind would not find some how that something was amiss. Confounding unless you realize that this is nothing but politics and the liberal lefts protecting their own and their money sources. it should be a crime to have this sort of fakery happening and then have leaders in authority go along with it. shame on Penn State.

[jackedit]

the interesting thing about this whitewash is that if you read the report, the only real scientist interviewed who was not a co-religionist of the climate warmers, Dr. Lindzen thought that Mann's methods were completely outside the norm of standard science, yet his testimony was completely ignored.
the committee also required evidence to be beyond a "reasonable doubt" when it came to finding Mann and his supporters to have "hid the decline" among other sins, but labeled the revelation of the emails to be "stolen" when there is not a shred of evidence to show that it was not much more likely released by a legitimate whistle blower exposing a group of frauds to be frauds.
So this "finding" by Penn insiders who have every reason to keep the millions of dollars of federal funding by finding Mann "innocent" is about as credible as the recent White House whitewash of bribing pols to not run in primaries ( Bill Clinton did it on his own) or BP to investigate itself and find that there is no oil shooting into the Gulf of Mexico because they are not Mexicans, or some other such nonsense.