Posted on 07/31/2012 3:43:07 PM PDT by opentalk
America, it's time to meet your newest top-secret government employee: a professional cover-up artist with a radical agenda.
Graham Spanier is the former Penn State University president who was fired during the Jerry Sandusky investigation for failing to properly investigate Sandusky when the pedophilia allegations first surfaced.
Spanier's "investigation" of Jerry Sandusky was so thoroughly inept that it got him fired. When it was completed, Spanier stated that he had "complete confidence in how they have handled the allegations against Sandusky," and he was fired very shortly thereafter. The recent Freeh report indicates that the investigation was conducted for the purpose of finding nothing. In other words, it was a cover-up.
It wasn't the only time Spanier rigged an inept investigation for the purpose of finding nothing. In 2010, his investigators found that Penn State climatologist Michael Mann had done nothing wrong when he invented his "hockey stick trick," to "hide the decline" and lend false credibility to climate change theory.
The difference between the Mann investigation and the Sandusky investigation is that one covered up a sex offender and the other covered up a fraud.change theory.
...America, meet your newest secret consultant. Graham Spanier, the professional cover-up artist with a history of promoting and covering evil deeds, has now been hired by your federal government for a top-secret consulting job that is so secret that we aren't even allowed to know what it is. Sounds like a good fit.
This man's primary skill is covering up dark things that make people look bad. They need him for something. They hired him as soon as he was available.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
However, another parallel is that views can change radically with new information as happened with Sandusky.
Here is a complete changeover by a scientist who was funded in the past by the Conservative Koch brothers.
“FOLLOW: Climate Change, Climate Change, Koch Brothers, Richard Muller, Richard a Muller, Richard Muller NYT, Richard Muller Climate Change, Richard Muller Global Warming, Richard Muller Humans Climate Change, Green News
“Humans are almost entirely the cause” of climate change, according to a scientist who once doubted that global warming even existed.
Last year, Richard Muller walked back years of climate change skepticism in light of new research. But Sunday’s comments go one step further.
Muller wrote in an NYT op-ed that after exhaustive research, he believes that an increase of greenhouse gases can be closely linked to the rise in the earth’s temperature. He explains:
Our results show that the average temperature of the earth’s land has risen by two and a half degrees Fahrenheit over the past 250 years, including an increase of one and a half degrees over the most recent 50 years. Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases
However, Muller said that he did not believe that the recent heat waves or Hurricane Katrina were caused by global warming.
Muller, a UCBerkeley professor, founded the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, which receives substantial funding from GOP powerhouse donor Charles Koch.”
Given last winter’s warmth, and this summer’s drought and heat waves, I wonder how many others, are changing their minds.
Obviously, if you support a liberal agenda then anything you say must be the truth. Even if it isn’t.
“Given last winter’s warmth, and this summer’s drought and heat waves, I wonder how many others, are changing their minds.”
As the liberals say when we see record cold: Weather and climate are two different things and individual weather events are not indicative of climate change.
Great post! “Wrong”, “is”, these lib psychos ala Spanier, Clinton, etal really have problems with the definitions of very simple words, the Nittanites ought to recall this guy and string him up.
Well, I believe Muller is half right. The world is becoming warmer. If you go back 70,000 years, where I sit right now was under a mile-thick sheet of ice. So was much of the northern hemisphere. The world has clearly been on a warming trend since then, as it gets back to it’s “normal” temperature. You see, we are still in an “ice age” as there is permanent ice on significant parts of the earth. Paleogeologists believe that has been the case only for about 5% of earth’s history.
The half Muller got wrong was the “mankind is causing this” part. There has been a lot more CO2 in the atomosphere in the past, the world has been a warmer place, and man had nothing to do with it. Nothing at all; we had an alibi. We weren’t here.
A a feature of the modern age is that some men have convinced themselves that mankind is in control of our destiny. Whether one believes in a divine providence or not, the power of nature is so overwhelming greater than the powers of mankind that this is nothing more than pure hubris. Pascal once commented to it took but a grain of sand in his bladder to reduce Cromwell, the greatest man in Europe at that time, to nothing.
It certainly was. It took priority over academics and athletics.
From the blog of W. M. Briggs, a statistician who critically evaluates papers on both sides of the AGW debate:
“There is nothing new scientifically in Muller’s press releases, except announcements the BEST papers that were long available are still available.
“Muller says, as people in his position have long been saying, that he himself, a one-time skeptic, a veritable prodigal son, has settled “the scientific debate.” The fallacy he makes is to say to himself, “I do not know of any flaws in my work, therefore there are none.” Common enough in academia.
“I imagine the New York Times won’t be publishing a rebuttal; news that is unwelcome is not newsworthy there. So the interesting test will be how much “traction” Muller’s ploy evinces on the left. The perpetually offended will raise a stink—blog posts with lots of exclamation points, arguments that if one skeptic converts all should, pieces filled with angry glee, that sort of thing. But what effect on the citizen? Nothing more than brief interest on a slow news day, and all forgotten next week? Or a resurgence in fear that, if we don’t start taxing and regulating people now, the end is nigh? Tax dollars, see, absorb carbon dioxide.
“Muller has a bit of luck on his side (it’s hot and dry in a few places in the USA this summer; but, for instance, England is cold and wet). Some man will say to himself, “Maybe this guy is right. I had to sweat yesterday.”
Briggs has posited a variety of questions related to the scientific reliability of Muller’s work; Muller has yet to anwer them.
What’s the saying?
Oh, yes: “Only in America.”
And Soviet Russia. And East Berlin. And Red China....
Complete utter bogus crap that Muller was a skeptic converted by an impartial look at the data.
http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/06/truth-about-richard-muller.html
“If Al Gore reaches more people and convinces the world that global warming is real, even if he does it through exaggeration and distortion - which he does, but he’s very effective at it - then let him fly any plane he wants.”
- Richard Muller, 2008 http://grist.org/article/lets-get-physical/
“There is a consensus that global warming is real. ...it’s going to get much, much worse.” - Richard Muller, 2008 http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/11/physics-the-nex/
“Let me be clear. My own reading of the literature and study of paleoclimate suggests strongly that carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels will prove to be the greatest pollutant of human history. It is likely to have severe and detrimental effects on global climate.” - Richard Muller, 2003 http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/13423/page2/
“I was never a skeptic” - Richard Muller, 2011http://www.huffingtonpost.com/blackberry/p.html?id=1072419
Beyond Muller’s misrepresentation as to his skeptical bona fides, his recent publicity splash to claim attribution based on his BEST temperature series has been pilloried by warmists, lukewarmists and skeptics alike. There is a comprehensive roundup of these denunciations at www.climatedepot.com.
Among the interesting points, the BEST paper purporting to find no meaningful impact from urban heating in temperature data series was rejected for publication in the Journal of Geophysical Research because it was, not to put too fine a point on it, crap. There are links to this story as well at ClimateDepot.com, including the comments of reviewer Ross McKittrick recommending against publication.
You could look it up.
You lost ME at “UCBerkeley”!
Thank you for this post. I agree with you 100%. It is pure hubris; the same sort of hubris we see everywhere else on the left. They believe we can ignore basic human nature just as they believe we control the world around us.
PA Ping!
If you want on/off the PA Ping List, please freepmail me. Thanks!
Since when does a scientist use the phrase, almost entirely ? And what caused climate change before apes evolved ?
Thank you for your detailed comments. Will give me something to study further.
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.