Jail the Faux Scientists - Climategate: Senator Ask for DOJ Investigation

.
Excerpts from Pajamas Media - February 21, 2010- by Charlie Martin

Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) asked the Obama administration to investigate what he called “the greatest scientific scandal of our generation” — ie Climategate: the actions of climate scientists and admissions by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Dr. Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University and Dr. James Hansen of Columbia University and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies are both of interest.

- Yeah, like the Obama Administration would do that.

Senator Inhofe also asked that Al Gore to be called back to the Senate to testify. Inhofe said, “In [Gore's] science fiction movie, every assertion has been rebutted.”

- Well, that slime bucket will never subject himself to honest scrutiny. He'll only attend functions where he knows no one will confront him.

According to Pajamas Media, the Senator Inhofe minority staff report from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee alleges:

"[The] Minority Staff of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works believe the scientists involved may have violated fundamental ethical principles governing taxpayer-funded research and, in some cases, federal laws. In addition to these findings, we believe the emails and accompanying documents seriously compromise the IPCC -backed “consensus” and its central conclusion that anthropogenic emissions are inexorably leading to environmental catastrophes."

According to Pajamas Media,

"The exposure of the "Climategate files" - ie leaked emails - has led to a reexamination of the IPCC Assessment Reports, especially the fourth report (AR4), published in 2007. The IPCC AR4 report was named by Environmental Protection Agency head Lisa Jackson as one of the major sources of scientific support for the agency’s Endangerment Finding, the first step towards allowing the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant."

The IPCC has been forced to retract a number of conclusions — such as that Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035 -  and has been forced to admit that the report was based on reports from environmental activist groups instead of peer-reviewed scientific research.

Dr. Murari Lal, editor of the IPCC AR4 report, admitted to the London Daily Mail that he had known the 2035 date was false, but was included in the report anyway “purely to put political pressure on world leaders.”

Senator Inhofe wants an investigation into research misconduct and criminal acts by the researchers. Further, Inhofe wants the EPA to drop its "Finding" that carbon dioxide is a pollutant and Congress to withdraw funding for consideration of carbon dioxide as a pollutant.

- Of all the stupid, ridiculous things the EPA and Congress have ever done...What was next, deeming all humans and animals major polluters for breathing out CO2??

The staff report noted the four major issues revealed by Climategate:

1.Scientists cooperated to obstruct the release of information and counter-evidence.
2.Scientists manipulated data to reach predetermined conclusions.
3.Scientists colluded to pressure journal editors not to publish work questioning the “consensus.”
4.Scientists involved in the report assumed the role of climate activists attempting to influence public opinion while claiming scientific objectivity.

The report also notes potential legal issues raised by Climategate:

1.Scientific misconduct may violate the Shelby Amendment — requiring open access to the results of government-funded research — and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) policies on scientific misconduct.
2.Potential for violations of the Federal False Statements and False Claims Acts, which may have both civil and criminal penalties.
3.Possibility of an obstruction of Congress in congressional proceeds, which may constitute an obstruction of justice.

If proven, these charges could debar the Scientists from federally funded research and maybe to criminal penalties.

- Are you kidding me? You mean there's a chance that they WON'T go to jail??)

Dr. Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit has already been forced to step aside because of the Climategate FOIA issues, and Dr. Michael Mann of Penn State is currently under investigation by the university for potential misconduct.

Senator Inhofe believes Dr. Hansen and Dr. Mann should be “let go” from their posts “for the good of the institutions involved.”

- Excuse me, Senator Inhofe, but the lies of these men have affected the entire world. I pray that the conservatives in our government won't allow them to walk away with a slap on the hand.

- Of course, the Obama Administration probably won't even acknowledge Senator Inhofe's appeal. The Democratic majority has blocked previous attempts by Inhofe to investigate issues with climate science. We might have to wait and hope for a new administration before justice is done.

For more of PJM’s Climategate coverage, read Charlie Martin’s “Climategate: The World’s Biggest Story, Everywhere but Here.”

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-and-the-law-senator-inhofe-to-ask-for-congressional-criminal-investigation-pajamas-mediapjtv-exclusive/
.

More Lies: Climate Researchers Manipulated & Hid Data

,From The Guardian Monday 1 February 2010 - Fred Pearce

E-mails leaked by hackers from the University of East Anglia's climatic research unit (CRU) turned up additional concerns. A study by the London paper, The Guardian, found serious flaws in measurements from Chinese weather stations, noting that documents from them could not be produced.

The e-mails revealed that Chinese monitoring stations were moved several times, making their data unreliable. This data was cited by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to prove rapid global warming in the last few decades.

Further, according to The Guardian, CRU chief scientist Phil Jones withheld information requested under freedom of information laws. Of 105 freedom of information requests concerning the climatic research unit (CRU), only 10 had been released in full.

There had been some question concerning the work of Jones's collaborator, Wei-Chyung Wang of the University at Albany-SUNY. Allegations are that he committed fraud in his research cited by the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC (2007) on
“urban heat islands” (a critical issue). Douglas J. Keenan has detailed it in a paper - THE FRAUD ALLEGATION AGAINST SOME CLIMATIC RESEARCH OF WEI-CHYUNG WANG

Wang was cleared of scientific fraud by his university, but new information brought on by the emails indicates at least one senior colleague had serious concerns about the affair and told Jones that he feared that Wang had "screwed up."

"The former director of the unit, Tom Wigley, harboured grave doubts about the cover-up of the shortcomings in Jones and Wang's work. Wigley was in charge of CRU when the original paper was published. "Were you taking W-CW [Wang] on trust?" he asked Jones. He continued: "Why, why, why did you and W-CW not simply say this right at the start?"

Unfortunately, it now seems that documents Wang claimed would exonerate him and Jones do not exist.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/02/climate-researchers-manipulated-hid-data/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/01/leaked-emails-climate-jones-chinese

"Climategate" & Leaked Emails: Scientists that should be Jailed

. 
Facts from the Wall Street Journal:

3,000 emails and documents of some of the world's most influential climatologists were released in the fall of 2009 after the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit's servers were hacked and messages were published on the Internet.

Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia's CRU, and Michael Mann, director of the Pennsylvania State University's Earth System Science Center, were two of the emailers that were focused on.

Among some of the facts that came out: These Scientists urged each other 'to present a "unified" view on their theory of man-made climate change, calling it an important "common cause." They also advised each other on how to adjust data so it wouldn't compromise their hypothesis, discussed ways to keep opposing views out of leading Science journals,  and gave tips on how to "hide the decline" of temperature in certain inconvenient data.

Mr. Jones wrote in 2005, "The two MMs (probably Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, two Canadians who devoted years trying to obtain the raw data and codes used in climate graphs, then fact-checking them) have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the U.K., I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone. . . . We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind."

Mann and friends also seemed to work at blacklisting scientists who disagreed wth their hypothesis of Global Warming, as well as journals that published Global Warming skeptics' work.

"I think we have to stop considering 'Climate Research' as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal," states an email (said to be from Mr. Mann in March 2003.)  "Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal."

Nice guy.  Reminds you of one of History's worst Scientists - Trofim Lysenko.

Quotes taken from the Wall Street Journal, Nov. 24, 2009 edition
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704888404574547730924988354.html?mod=djemEditorialPage