Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 11/29/2009 6:39:43 PM PST by Libloather
Penn State scientist fights back
Michael Mann says global warming e-mails are being taken out of context
By Frank Warner
Of The Morning Call
November 26, 2009
Penn State scientist Michael E. Mann on Wednesday said his recently disclosed global warming e-mails show only that he's been pursuing the facts and fighting sloppy science.
But Mann distanced himself from a 2008 e-mail by British scientist Phil Jones, who asked Mann and others to delete certain e-mails sought under Freedom of Information laws.
''I'm not going to defend that request,'' Mann said. ''I did not approve of what he asked for and I didn't follow through on it. I have all of my original e-mails.''
Mann said another e-mail in which Jones suggests using Mann's ''Nature trick - to hide the decline'' has been misinterpreted to mean his ''trick'' was an act of deception on temperatures, when it was simply a clearer way to chart global warming.
The journal Nature published Mann's chart in 1998.
Mann also said his 2003 e-mail saying ''it would nice to 'contain' the putative 'MWP''' was not a call for scientists to deny the Earth warmed naturally 1,000 years ago. He said it reflected his desire to identify exactly when the Medieval Warm Period began.
(Excerpt) Read more at mcall.com ...
11/28 ClimateGate's Michael Mann To Be Investigated By Penn State
11/25 Penn State scientist in hot seat over global warming e-mails (professor distorted facts)
11/23 Alumni Letters Coming to Penn State Calling for Ouster of Michael Mann
Ah yes, the standard refrain of the naughty lib with his hand caught in the cookie jar. When will people see past this?
He’s had plenty of time to come up with a plausible defense.
Pretty lame defense.
“The journal Nature published Mann’s chart in 1998.”
Does Mann date his work pre or post Bin Laden’s declaration of war in 1998?
As a nittany lion, I am ashamed of this guy.
JoePa (a republican) needs to go kick some A’.
To: “Michael E. Mann”
Subject: IPCC & FOI
Date: Thu May 29 11:04:11 2008
Mike,
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise. I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!! Cheers
Phil Prof. Phil Jones Climatic Research Unit
I hope Algore gets some jail time out of it.
ping
The e-mails definitely have Mann advocating and likely participating in unethical behavior toward the peer review process of scientific publication
Old battle to retain his status:
Oh I understand it now, just a big misunderstanding /s
Does Al Gore have to give back his fraudulently obtained peace prize now?
There is nothing ‘out of context’ about trashing scientists who don’t agree with you and strong arming editorial boards and screwing with the peer review process. It’s arrogant, and extremely harmful to science. Anyone can make a mistake, and there are probably few scientists in the world who couldn’t have at least some of their data questioned at some level, but this is over the top opportunism that has hurt people. A confident scientist would let his or her data speak for itself, and would have no problem debating and defending their findings and hypotheses with those who have different data and different opinions. It’s healthy for science to have arguments and competing theories etc. It’s not healthy for science to be controlled by a group of collaborating elites who are all in agreement with each other, dominate the funding, dominate the peer review process, and suppress opposing views. That’s crime, not science. Suspend funding pending investigation.
Kick his a$$ ‘till his nose bleeds, Joe.
RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT! EVERYBODY in the WORLD that has read those emails is taking them out of context. EVERY NEW MEDIA BLOGGER in the WORLD is taking them out of context.
WOW! THAT would be quite a conspiracy wouldn’t it.
If this guy is an example of the kind of faculty Penn State retains... Well, I don't think my son, who is interested in a scientific field, needs to be exposed-to and influenced-by people who partake in and support this kind of academic and scientific dishonesty.
My son will not be attending Penn State... Unless we see this guy severely disciplined, and Penn State supporting unbiased research, analysis, and publications on the true nature of Global Warming and Climate Change - not the sensationalism and power-grab.
Pfft. It didn’t even take them a week to go this route.
First it was silence hoping it was going to go away
Then it was ‘go after the criminal hackers’
Then they tried slander.
Then it was ‘people aren’t educated enough to understand the science’
Then they tried obfuscation.
Now they are being taken out of context.
Didn’t even take them a week. Without a complicit media, this issue would be a raging fire on the way to ashes and coals. With a complicit media, it is just taking longer.
Ann Coulter had it right when she described the two major refuges of liberals under attack:
“I was misquoted”
“I was taken out of context.”
They are so damned predictable.
I call BS.
I’m a bit suspect of this entire thing.
I downloaded the original “hacked” .zip file and have spent a good deal of time with it.
The file labeled “email” - isn’t really email. They are 1073 text files that appear to be “derived” from original emails. They cover a period from March 1996 - November 2009. This type of formatting is generally done by an email archiving program that separates and indexes emails to make them searchable.
These files were (IMHO) obviously searched and culled from an archiving system. There is no single sender, recipient, subject, or key word that would tie them all together - and in the course of 13 years the mail server at East Anglia would obviously have more than 1073 emails.
The point is - that if these are pre-selected files - who did the selecting and what was there purpose?
I’m starting to think that these files were purposely leaked, and contain harmful - but defensible emails. We are now just starting to see the “defense.” The leak may have been an effort to derail those demanding data under FOIA - now they can say - “hey we’ve got no more secrets - we’ve been hacked - we’re an open book.”
I’m working on a fairly extensive blog post on this subject I’ll be sure to bore everyone with the link when I’m through !
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.