Michael Mann (courtesy Penn State U.)
Dr. Michael E. Mann, famed originator of the "Hockey Stick" graph, is now officially under investigation by his current employer, Penn State University. But Penn State's own press release raises an immediate question of how thorough that investigation will be.
Anthony Watts, of WattsUpWithThat, reported today that Penn State had issued this press release announcing its intention to review Dr. Mann's work in order to "address" certain "question" and "concerns" that have been "raised" by the recent exposure of the CRU archive. Watts' report was noted by Noel Sheppard of NewsBusters.org.
In its press release, Penn State referred to a report, titled Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2000 Years, by the Board of Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, National Academy of Sciences. This report, made at the request of then-Representative Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY), essentially concluded that Mann's hockey-stick results were "sound."
Climatic Research Unit (Photo courtesy CRU)
However, as Watts points out in his entry, the NAS report was not the only report on Mann's work. Another report, commissioned by Representative Joe Barton (R-TX-6) and written by Edward J. Wegman, of George Mason University, and his associates, reached the opposite conclusion: that Mann's work was unsound. More than that, the Wegman committee raised questions about the conduct of climate science generally that anticipate, in nearly every particular, the questionable research methods revealed in the CRU Archive.
The Penn State press release admits that the CRU Archive and its contents "raise" various "questions" and "concerns" that were not the subjects of the NAS report. What those concerns are, Penn State refuses to state. Possibly they include Mann's guilty knowledge of, or participation in, the willful destruction of data that might be subject to a Freedom of Information request, either in the UK or in the USA. E-mail file 1212073451.txt contains the most damaging information in this regard:
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.
By "AR4" Dr. Phil Jones, Director of the Climatic Research Unit, means the Fourth Assessment Report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Rep. Joe Barton (VoteUsa.org)
Mann's contemptuous attitude toward the committee formerly chaired by Rep. Barton has already been discussed. However, the more important question is why Penn State chose to ignore the Wegman report. That report raises a number of concerns of its own about the then-current (and still-current) state of climate science. Specifically, Wegman et al., charged that the "Hockey Stick" is the product of improper statistical treatment of the data and for that reason alone was not valid. Furthermore, Wegman et al., stated that Mann et al. had formed an "inner circle" and refused to interact with the general community of statisticians (who might be expected to have an opinion on their treatment of the data), and that Mann and other principal investigators had a habit of "review[ing] one another's work" and "reus[ing] the same data sets." This, said the Wegman committee, meant that the work of Mann and other investigators might not be as independent as they pretended.
In fact, as the CRU Archive plainly shows, Mann, Jones, and the other investigators named in the CRU Archive have never changed their practices since the time that the Wegman Committee sat.
That the NAS report should never have mentioned any of the concerns raised by the Wegman report, calls into question the quality of the work of the NAS, especially since the Wegman report has now been more than vindicated. And that Penn State should have ignored the Wegman report raises a question of how objective Penn State's academic reviewers intend to be.
(The Wegman Report is hardly a forgotten piece of criticism. It bore mention on examiner.com as recently as October, a scant six weeks before the CRU Archive story broke.)
Like this article? Want to be notified of more? Click Subscribe above.
Comments
Actually, the most damaging email for Michael Mann is not the one asking him to destroy evidence in response to a Freedom of Information Act request (the subject line of the email was "IPCC & FOI", just in case there might be any confusion over the purpose of the request). No, the most damaging email is the one he sent in reply, which attaches the request to destroy evidence:
Phil Jones to Michael Mann:
Mike, Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise... 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 ...
Michael Mann to Phil Jones a few hours later (attaching the above email and keeping the same subject IPCC & FOI):
"I’ll contact Gene about this ASAP. His new email is: generwahl@xxxxxxx"
That's B.A.D.
The Title is "Penn state to investigate Michael Mann or Whitewash him".
Come on, The Country is broken and Morally bankrupt...most especially in Academia. So honestly....Investigate or WHITEWASH....which do you think???
Fraud in scientific research is a growing problem. It is linked to the need to publish and bring finding dollars into institutions as a necessary condition for tenure.
When I was a grad student in chemistry I could not reproduce the results of a fellow student. Shortly after earning her/his Ph.D. his employer terminated her/him for falsifying research data.
When the stakes are very high and a few win big at the expense of others cheating is inevitable...case in point...steroids and professional athletics. (Also see the PBS NOVA special on steroids doping by E. Germany)
OOPs ..typing error. Please read "funding dollars" not "finding dollars in the previous post.
OOPs ..typing error. Please read "funding dollars" not "finding dollars in the previous post.
I suspect Penn. will choose whitewash over censure and dismissal. Mann, with pressure from his elitist climate change friends, brings several millions in grants annually to the university. Unless they can profit by distancing themselves from Mann they will support him.
I expect Penn State will do a whitewash. Too many $$$ at stake.
LOL one left wing bootcamp to investigate another.. Fiction based justice for a fiction based problem..
LOL the only oil I see is the grease in Al Gores hair.. Move over Neville Chamberlain you are now the number two biggest fool of all time.. It was bound to happen..
Why are the Russians the only source of coverage in the MSM.. We have to go to Russia to be free from the leftists? The world has gone mad..
Penn State has ample cause to fire Professor Piltdown Mann. They should do it before they lose all credibility.
Get real. Mann has only been at PSU for less than 4 years, so there no big ties to him. He went to PSU because it's a big research school with the world's best meteorology department. PSU has billions of $ of federal research projects, ($30 billion last I heard) they have far more to loose by trying to cover something up. Mann's research is a pittance to that school, were talking in the 10's of thousands.
Furthermore scientist are notoriously childish, and persnickety, his colleagues will jump at the chance to crucify him for the slightest appearance of impropriety.
Furthermore, I've seen nothing irregular in the use of the data sets. As a statistician I can assure you that there is nothing wrong with using or integrating multiple data sets, as long as you do it correctly. So far, everything I've seen seems to have been done correctly.
You have no idea why he asked emails to be deleted, it may not be for as sinister a reason as it seems.
What nonsensical tripe! "They have more to lose by covering it up"? On what planet? If they publicly say "we hire frauds", then how could anyone justify underwriting research? (They couldn't). If they cover it up, it is business as usual. You are a useful idiot and the problem in the world today.
I am a current student at Penn State, and I can tell you EXACTLY what will happen with this investigation--the investigative unit will make LOUD noise over investigating any improprieties, take a few months to laugh at the public in general and snub their noses at them, and then declare--after a thorough investigation of Mann et. al--(with much fanfare) that nothing in his exemplary work was dishonest or in error, and that the public owes a great apology to this fine scientist, a man we should all try to emulate.
Personally, I laugh at the federal government employees that continue to pump dollars into PSU's "scientific research" departments, knowing full well the fraud and abuse that takes place with my taxpaying dollars in said units. The bottom line is that PSU will destroy ANY evidence they find while investigating Mann--how could they afford not to, with so many dollars at stake? I love earning my degree at PSU, but personally question the ethics of many "Professionals" there
Todd--you are incorrect my friend. Your statement, "his colleagues will jump at the chance to crucify him for the slightest appearance of impropriety," is incorrect, for PSU does not allow other scientists to bash each other, it is unprofessional and borders on liable. Furthermore, they will be ordered to back him 100% to avoid any further scandal--regardless or not if he is wrong. That is, unless the PSU organization has changed and allows the truth to come out, LMAO, yeah, right--let my wipe the laughter tears from my eyes--okay, now I'm back. No, this will be swept under the rug, as is PSU's operational mode. PSU preaches character to their students, yet expect none and have none from many of their "professional" scientists or leaders, for that matter. Truth is relevant, it seems.
Can somebody help me? I have been trying for the last 2 years to find data on the heat flux from the earth's interior as a source of global temperature change. I have contacted the Dept of Energy,Southern Methodist University (2X), Penn State, Naval Research Lab, and even National Geographic Magazine..... noone answers my queries. I'm just looking for references !
@Fred T: try contacting the recipients of NSF grants for research in Earth core thermodynamics. If you are thinking it might affect climate however it has essentially no affect (save lithospheric morphology). The temperatures in the earths core are a product of pressure,nearer the crust where there is much less pressure the thermal affects are negligible.
@Jckst: Funny, I am a Geosci student at PSU, and they have never brushed anything under the carpet. PSU jumps through hoops to insure the academic integrity of it's research, especially in the Earth sciences. We have several of the top programs in the world here and the office of research affairs doesn't care who you are, if you breech policy your ass is out. If you do attend PSU, stop by west campus and visit Dr. Mann's office. He posted all of the email's in question and frankly, they are absolutely innocent when read in context.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!