Climate scientist partially absolved of charges but investigation to pursue further

An investigation by Penn State University cleared Dr.
Michael Mann of wrongdoing on some charges but
further investigation will be conducted into another.
(Penn State)

The first phase of an investigation into Dr. Michael Mann, one of the key figures of the Climategate email scandal, has concluded with mixed results for the professor. While he was absolved of three allegations, further inquiry will be made into a fourth.

Penn State University began in the inquiry in the days following the release of thousands of emails from the world’s top climate scientists. The messages alluded to the possibility that data was manipulated, records destroyed and that the group colluded together to prevent dissenting opinions from being heard.

The investigation centered around four allegations of Mann that “could be construed as allegations of research misconduct.” They included:

1. Suppressing or falsifying data – i.e. his mention of a “trick” to “hide the decline”
2. Deleting information regarding his work with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – i.e. The request from Dr. Phil Jones to delete emails related to AR4
3. Engaging in misuse of confidential information – i.e. ‘conspiratorial discussions’ showing misuse of information
4. Participating in actions that were outside ‘accepted practices’ of research – i.e. did Mann and his colleagues adhere to norms in the course of their research

More than 1000 emails that were either sent to, sent by or mentioned Mann were initially looked at. These were winnowed down to 47 that the panel felt were relevant to the allegations.

They then questioned Mann personally who denied any wrongdoing. In the report released by the panel, they seemed quite taken with their meeting with the professor saying, “All were impressed by Dr. Mann’s composure and his forthright responses.”

Of the first three charges, the panel found “no credible evidence” that he engaged in any of those activities. For the fourth however, the panel found that further investigation is required.

The university’s policy speaks to “Public trust in the integrity and ethical behavior of scholars is essential.” It was the panel’s concern that given the high visibility of the Climategate scandal and the questions that arose from it, that trust may have been violated.

“Given that this may be undermining confidence in his findings as a scientist, and given that it may be undermining public trust in science in general and climate science specifically, the inquiry committee believes an investigatory committee of faculty peers from diverse fields should be constituted under RA-10 to further consider this allegation,” the group wrote.

An investigatory committee of five Penn State faculty members has been created and will report their findings within 120 days.

Mann released a statement saying, “I fully support the additional inquiry which may be the best way to remove any lingering doubts. I intend to cooperate fully in this matter – as I have since the beginning of the process."

Many were less than congratulatory on the findings although they were not surprised. Skeptics have believed that the outcome of the investigation into Mann and his counterpart in England, Phil Jones, were predetermined in favor of the scientists.

Writing for the U.K. Telegraph, James Delingpole said, “What we’re seeing both at scientific institutions and in government is a closing of ranks, and a fierce determination that regardless of evidence or reason the AGW gravy train must roll on at all costs and that no guilt should be admitted by any of the offending parties.”

• On the net: RA-10 Inquiry Report: Concerning the Allegations of Research Misconduct Against Dr. Michael E. Mann, Department of Meteorology, College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University

More from the Climate Change Examiner: