Recently in Climategate Category

After Lord Monckton's lengthy rebuttal yesterday to John Abraham's 83 minute critique, Professor Abraham has decided to remove 10 minutes of his presentation.

From wattsupwiththat.com

"Latest news - sent to me by two readers of Anthony's outstanding blog - is that Abraham, inferentially on orders from the Trustees of his university acting on advice from their lawyers, has (without telling me) re-recorded his entire 83-minute talk to take out the very many direct accusations of "misrepresentation", "complete fabrication", "sleight of hand" etc. etc. that he had hurled at me in the original version of his talk. For instance, he now seems to have appreciated his unwisdom in having accused me of having "misrepresented" the work of scientists I had not even cited in the first place.

Taking out his direct libels has reduced the length of his talk by 10 minutes. To my own lawyers, Abraham's retreat will be of interest, because it is in effect an admission that his talk is libelous, and that he and his university know it is libelous. Though his new version corrects some of the stupider and more egregious errors in the original, many crass errors remain, including errors of simple arithmetic that are surely disfiguring in a "scientist" presuming to correct mine."

Anchored by Andrea Canning - Original Air Date: Monday July 12, 2010

ABC News Global Warming Debate Part 1:

Thanks to Climate Realists

Christopher Monckton has issued an extensive and detailed critique and refutation of a widely circulated 83-minute personal attack on him by one J.P. Abraham, a lecturer in fluid mechanics at the University of St. Thomas, Minnesota.

Professor Abraham's 83-minute lecture with 115 slides purported to demolish a talk about climate change that Lord Monckton had given in St. Paul, Minnesota, in October 2009. More than 2.5 million people have seen Monckton's talk on YouTube, making it one of the most popular viewings on the web.

In June 2010, John Abraham posted up an attack on the internet via the servers of the University of St. Thomas. Within a week, Monckton's response letter with its near-500 questions was in Abraham's hands, to which he has not responded as challenged.

Monckton publicly accuses Abraham of -

Bad faith in having "furtively" spent eight months preparing his savage personal attack behind Monckton's back, entirely contrary to accepted academic practice;

Malice in having made dozens of serious allegations about Monckton when he knew the allegations he had made were false in every material particular, or had no reason to believe the allegations were true;

Appealing to a false authority on the subject of the climate that, as a lecturer in fluid mechanics, he did not possess (Monckton demonstrates Abraham appears at times incompetent even in arithmetic);

Academic dishonesty in having repeatedly made up statements that Monckton had not made, having put those statements to other scientists, having obtained hostile responses from those scientists, and having included those hostile responses in his attack as though they were responses to what Monckton had said; and

Lying repeatedly by misstating what Monckton had said and then attacking those misstatements; by falsely and repeatedly alleging that Monckton had misrepresented scientists' results when Monckton had either accurately represented the results or not cited the scientists he was alleged to have misrepresented at all; by unjustifiably and repeatedly impugning Monckton's integrity, qualifications, experience, and competence in a manner that he knew to be inaccurate; and by repeatedly taking Monckton's words out of their context and making a willful nonsense of them.

Download Monckton's critique.

By Patrick J. Michaels, WSJ

Global warming alarmists claim vindication after last year's data manipulation scandal. Don't believe the 'independent' reviews.

Last November there was a world-wide outcry when a trove of emails were released suggesting some of the world's leading climate scientists engaged in professional misconduct, data manipulation and jiggering of both the scientific literature and climatic data to paint what scientist Keith Briffa called "a nice, tidy story" of climate history. The scandal became known as Climategate.

Now a supposedly independent review of the evidence says, in effect, "nothing to see here." Last week "The Independent Climate Change E-mails Review," commissioned and paid for by the University of East Anglia, exonerated the University of East Anglia. The review committee was chaired by Sir Muir Russell, former vice chancellor at the University of Glasgow.

Read the rest of the article.

By Dr. Tim Ball Thursday, Canada Free Press

There were two British investigations into the behavior of scientists at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia (UEA) exposed in leaked emails. Both reports provide no answers, no explanations and are only telling for what they did not ask or do and how they were manipulated. The blatant level of cover up is frightening. These are acts by people who believe they are unaccountable because they have carried out the greatest scam in history with impunity. The degree of cover up in both cases is an arrogant in-your-face statement that we are the power and are not answerable to anyone. Their cover up almost belittles the ones they are investigating.

Read the rest of the article.

By David Derbyshire, DailyMail

The scientist at the heart of the 'Climategate' scandal got his job back yesterday, despite being criticised by the official inquiry for being secretive and unhelpful.

Professor Phil Jones was suspended as head of the influential Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia last year after leaked emails appeared to show his team manipulated data and blocked Freedom of Information requests.

But he was reinstated after a six-month inquiry cleared him and colleagues of wrongdoing and concluded their 'rigour and honesty' was not in doubt.
The university said the £200,000 official review should 'lay to rest the conspiracy theories, untruths and misunderstandings that have circulated' since the stolen emails were published online.

But sceptics condemned the report as a whitewash and said it left many questions unanswered.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1292703/Climategate-scientist-Phil-Jones-STILL-gets-job-back.html?ito=feeds-newsxml#ixzz0t6pHRpgv

By Roger F. Gay, mensnewsdaily.com

As CNN explains it; "An independent report released Wednesday into the leaked "Climategate" e-mails found no evidence to question the "rigor and honesty" of scientists involved." That seems to be the general conclusion offered by Muir Russell, chairman of the select group of political insiders who conducted the review.

The review focused on "the behaviors of the scientists in the climatic research unit in the University of East Anglia," which was at the center of the Climategate scandal. Russell provided a carefully worded public statement on the review.

"Those behaviors have been commented on in the light of a release - an improper release of emails in the autumn of 2009, not long before the Copenhagen conference. We went through this very carefully and we concluded that these behaviors did not damage our judgment of the integrity, the honesty, the rigor with which they had operated as scientists. And that's a comment about the processes that they went through to produce their work, to handle their data, to have their work peer-reviewed, and so on. A lot of what they do makes a big impact on the advice that goes to policy-makers, both domestically and internationally, and we concluded similarly that these behaviors that were the subject of criticism had not affected the impact on the policy advice. What we did however conclude was that they had not shown sufficient openness in the way in which they responded to requests for information about what they were doing, about the data they were processing, about the stations they were analyzing, and so on. And we've made a number of recommendations both for them and for the University of East Anglia in terms of how it manages its freedom of information process, and how it manages its risk process."

It's a bit of a brain-sneezer to imply that the researchers operated generally as good and proper scientists in the way data was handled, their work was produced and reviewed, and then state that they were deficient in providing information essential to the processes. If the data can't be confirmed and the details of work aren't explained, it's not science. A series of unsupportable statements promoting an idea isn't science, it's a marketing campaign.

Read the rest of the article.

By Elmer Beauregard

I was checking out the blogoshere and the latest on Michael Mann and how he has been cleared of all wrong doing. I noticed that they are now admitting he did hide the decline, but now their saying that its no big deal.

An End to Climategate? Penn State Clears Michael Mann
Wyatt Andrews, CBS News

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.

The five key leaked emails from UEA's Climatic Research Unit
Fred Pearce, guardian.co.uk

Jones and Mike Mann had been adding real temperatures to the end longer graphs of temperature estimates based on tree rings. The only thing being "hidden" was tree ring data that did not match reality.

This last statement is remarkable because it shows that what is being done in the realm of "Climate Science" is not science at all but rather politics.

By Jeremy A. Kaplan, FoxNews.com

Michael Mann, the author of a notorious scientific study that is a tent pole of global warming public policy, has been found innocent of charges of improper conduct.

Once again.

Mann's seminal work was a 1998 climate study that showed a sharp, hockey-stick-shaped increase in the world's temperatures based on an analysis of age rings in trees. Despite ongoing criticism, the study formed the backbone of global warming theories -- until leaked e-mails from top climate scientists cast fresh doubt on Mann's methodology and integrity, notably "the trick" he used to make his data so compelling.

A group of six of Mann's Penn State colleagues found him innocent of 3 out of 4 charges on February 3, but the investigative panel requested a deeper, more thorough look into whether his conduct deviated from standard scientific practice.

So the panel asked Mann five questions, spoke with his boss, and interviewed three other climate scientists. Case closed.

Rest of the article.

He discusses his new book Power Grab plus other recent events on the Alex Jones Show.

Attorney and author Christopher C. Horner, a Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Mr. Horner has represented CEI as well as scientists and members of the U.S. House and Senate on matters of environmental policy in the federal courts including the Supreme Court. He writes for legal and industrial trade journals and online opinion pages. Mr. Horner is the author of two best-selling books: Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud and Deception to Keep You Misinformed and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism, which spent half of 2007 on the New York Times bestseller list.

Power Grab: How Obama's Green Policies Will Steal Your Freedom and Bankrupt America

Listen to his radio Interview here.

Investigation "prudent" says A-G

No infringement on academic freedom
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli said Wednesday the investigation by his office into the research activities of a former UVA scientist is about possible fraud and is in no way an infringement on academic freedom Cuccinelli said that he is not investigating Dr. Michael Mann's scientific conclusions and that the legal standards for the misuse of taxpayer dollars apply the same at universities as they do any other agency of state government.

The Attorney General stated that it was not normal policy to comment on open investigations for the sake of the individuals involved as well as the investigative process. The Office had sent a Civil Investigative Demand to the University of Virginia to obtain documents related to the work of Dr. Mann who is a leading researcher in climate change and was part of the University's faculty between 1999 and 2005.

The C.I.D. was made public on The Hook website by someone other than the office of the attorney general though they have now confirmed the documentation is authentic.
A statement issued said: "The revelations of the so-called Climate-gate indicate that some data may have been deliberately manipulated to arrive at pre-set conclusions. The use of manipulated data to apply for taxpayer-funded research grants in Virginia is potentially fraud. Given this, the only prudent thing to do was to look into it."
"The same legal standards for fraud apply to the academic setting that apply elsewhere," said Cuccinelli. "The same rule of law, the same objective fact-finding process will take place."

U.Va. has hired a law firm to explore legal options - agreed to by the Attorney General - signaling a possible fight regarding the demand.

According to the C.I.D., the equivalent of a subpoena, the Attorney General is investigating the possibility Dr. Mann is in violation of the Fraud against Taxpayers Act because he may have presented false or misleading data relating to climate change while seeking state-funded research grants.

Bethany Stotts, AustralianConservative.com

WASHINGTON: Pennsylvania State University professor and climatologist Michael Mann recently threatened to sue a group for its video satire of his climate science entitled "Hide the Decline."

The video, created by Minnesotans for Global Warming (M4GW) refers to an email from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit director, Phil Jones to Prof. Michael Mann and two other scientists. "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie [sic] from 1981 onwards) amd [sic] from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline," writes Prof. Jones in the November 16, 1999 email.

Rest of the article

By Paul Chesser, American Spectator

Virginia attorney general Kenneth Cuccinelli II has filed an exhaustive investigative request with the University of Virginia, seeking records pertaining to research grants obtained by Climategate scientist Michael Mann. The Washington Post:

Meanwhile over the weekend the alarmist group PennFuture hosted a global warming conference (called "Creating a Climate for Justice") in Pittsburgh, where Mann was a featured speaker. The Pennsylvania Coalition for Responsible Government decided to show up with some signs and, with help from Milloy, were able to park a 12' by 30' truck sign in front of the reception hall, to provide an appropriate welcome for the decline hider.

Entire article

By Gene J. Koprowski, FOXNews.com

A leading global warming skeptic recruited a group of concerned citizens to fact-check the sources referenced in the U.N.'s latest climate-change bible -- and gave the report an "F." Now she's planning the nail in the coffin: a comprehensive audit of the entire report.

Following a series of scandals that led to doubts about the accuracy of the United Nations' most recent climate-change report, Donna Laframboise of NoConsensus.org gathered a group of citizens online and proved that the U.N. over-relied upon so-called "gray literature," rather than using exclusively peer-reviewed scientific reports as the organization was supposed to do.

Now Laframboise and her colleagues are taking the next step, FoxNews.com has learned. They are building an online database that will let everyone see exactly what the report claims -- and precisely how it came to those conclusions.

"There's a pile of work that can and should be done on this report," Laframboise told FoxNews.com.

The Canadian watchdog is working with a computer programmer in Australia whose software will let her and her colleagues further analyze the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the U.N.'s climate arm.

"It's starting to look good, and he is linking in all sorts of other material, including IPCC reviewer comments to various parts of the text -- at the moment they aren't easy to access by the average person -- as well as the entire Climate-gate e-mail database," Laframboise said.

Rest of the story.

Here is a good explanation of what's behind the phrase "Hide the Decline".

From our friends at JunkScience.com

Soon after the Climategate scandal broke in November 2009, Minnesotans for Global Warming (M4GW) produced and posted on YouTube a video satire, entitled "Hide the decline." The video parodies an excerpt from the Climategate e-mails in which the University of East Anglia's Phil Jones states,

I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and (sic) from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline.

The "Mike" referred to by Phil Jones is Penn State University's Michael Mann who is credited with developing the so-called "hockey stick" graph which purports to represent mean global temperature changes over the past one millennium. The hockey stick graph has been both central to the debate over manmade global warming and controversial. While the hockey stick was featured prominently in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Third Assessment Report (TAR, 2001), it was largely omitted from the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4, 2007).

Rest of the article.

Interactive lyrics to the new version of the song "Hide The Decline II".

Will be on Neil Cavuto today.

By Elmer Beauregard

After being up for one day the new version of "Hide the Decline" hosted on The No Cap-and-Trade Coalition's channel was pulled by youTube, along with all the other copies of the original version of the video made by Minnesotans For Global Warming.

When you click on the movie to play it you get this message.

This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by JibJab Media Inc..

It is true the original version did contain JibJab content, the claymation video with Michael Mann's head on it was made on JibJab's website. I also put a disclaimer at the beginning of the website that JibJab was not responsible for this content.

The new version "Hide The Decline II" did not, however, contain any JibJab content or the image of Michale Mann that was in dispute in the letter from Mann's attorney. So I'm wondering why it got yanked. I'm sure it was a little like playing Whack-A-Mole for youTube, everybody and their sister was uploading the original version to their youTube channel. Maybe in their zeal youTube inadvertently wiped out the new version.

by Matt Hadro at Human Events

Experts on opposing sides of the global-warming debate are now squaring off against each other over a satirical Internet video.

On one side is Dr. Michael Mann, professor of Meteorology at Penn State University, who has been ensnared in the Climategate scandal. He is threatening to sue Minnesotans for Global Warming (M4GW) after the group produced a satirical video called "Hide the Decline," which features Mann's face and makes fun of his scientific findings, and accuses him of covering up evidence of an apparent decline in temperatures over the past decade.

On the other side is Dr. Patrick Michaels, a contributing author and reviewer on the U.N.'s 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and a well-known skeptic of global-warming alarmism. At a National Press Club press conference Tuesday, Michaels criticized Mann for having "very, very, very thin skin."

The notion that a professor would file a lawsuit over a satirical video "is just quite shocking," said Dr. Michaels.

Rest of the article

The No Cap and Trade Coalition is now hosting a new version of the 'Hide the Decline' video.

Instead of focusing just on Mann the new video presents a generic scientist that represents all scientists embroiled in the Climategate controversy. The coalition has developed a white paper entitled, "Dr. Michael Mann: Defamed or Defined by Hide the Decline," which defends the video.

Available for download here.

Sign the petition here.

Climategate Figure Threatens Lawsuit over Satirical YouTube Video 'Hide the decline' - No Cap-and-Trade Coalition Says "Bring it on."

Washington, DC -- Penn State University's Michael Mann, one of the central figures in the Climategate scandal, has threatened legal action against Minnesotans for Global Warming (M4GW) over the group's popular satirical YouTube video "Hide the Decline." The No Cap-and-Trade Coalition, a group that includes M4GW, responded today at an event at the National Press Club, releasing Mann's threatening letter and an updated version of the "Hide the Decline" video.

"We understand why Michael Mann is eager to silence public discussion of the hockey stick scandal," said Jeff Davis of No Cap-and-Trade, "but truth is an absolute defense."

The original "Hide the Decline" video, which had more than 500,000 viewers, was removed today from YouTube by M4GW's Elmer Beauregard. It received national attention when Rush Limbaugh played it on his radio show and was later featured on CBS Evening News in the wake of the Climategate email scandal. "Hide the Decline" parodied Mann, the Penn State professor who is largely responsible for the creation of the now debunked "hockey stick" graph, which purported to show a dramatic spike in average global temperature during the 20th century after 900 years of relatively constant temperature.

The video spotlighted a phrase from one of the central "Climategate" e-mails in which the University of East Anglia's Phil Jones explains how he used Mann's "Nature trick" to "hide the decline" of key temperature data. The hockey stick graph relied on "hiding this decline."

Leading Climate Scientist Threatens Legal Action against Minnesota Group for Satirical YouTube Video

There will be a Press Conference Today, April 20th, 10:00 AM (Eastern Time)
At the National Press Club - 529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor, Washington, DC

Attendees will be Minnesotans for Global Warming, Pat Michaels, Myron Ebell, members of the No Cap and Trade Coalition

A satirical internet video was featured on national news programs after it went viral last year. It's attracted the ire of one of the world's most renowned climate scientists, who is now threatening legal action over the video. Minnesotans for Global Warming, the no-budget group behind it approaches global warming issues with a sense of humor. They will give their side of the story and explain how they are dealing with the legal threat.

One shows flooding the other a drought, kids aren't sure what they are supposed to be afraid of!

As usual the global warming fear mongers display both sides of the spectrum to cover their butts, so no matter what happens they can say Global Warming caused it.

Climate Change ExaminerTony Hake

Scare tactic newspaper advertisements from Britain's Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) have been banned by a government advertising watchdog agency. Two ads in a series which used child nursery rhymes to warn about the purported dangers of manmade climate change were found to have unsubstantiated claims in them.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) reviewed the ads after receiving more than 900 complaints from British citizens - the most complaints it received on any ad last year.

The two offending ads were based on the nursery rhymes of 'Jack and Jill' and 'Rub a Dub Dub' and warned of the effects of extreme weather, a claim which has long been disproven.

Without a background in climate science, the ASA relied on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) reports to determine the accuracy of the ads. In its conclusion, the ASA said the ads failed to meet code based on a lack of substantiation, truthfulness and their environmental claims.

UN looks to set a new panel overseeing the old one.. Body in question is the IPCC responsible for monitoring climate change. Lately it was accused of fuzzy research hyping the hysteria surrounding global warming.