Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« NZ climatologists lose their calculations | Main | Peer reviewers acting as gatekeepers »
Tuesday
Feb022010

Penn State inquiry reports

The Penn State inquiry into the conduct of Michael Mann has apparently concluded....without apparently taking evidence from anyone who thinks that Mann might have done something wrong.

I wonder if they think that anyone will find this a very convincing inquiry.

Amusing also to see that the Penn State inquiry has completed its work before Sir Muir Russell's "independent" review of the Climatic Research Unit has even started. As I understand it, Sir Muir is still putting his team together and finalising the terms of reference.

It almost looks as if he's dragging his feet.

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (11)

Mr Bishop, you're creeping fast into conspirationland. You're freaking me out lately with your posts. Stop it.

Feb 2, 2010 at 10:47 AM | Unregistered CommenterLuis

What a surprise.

You are not freaking me out. In a mileau in which many conspiracies are out in the open, it seems rather prudent to assume there might be others.

Feb 2, 2010 at 11:08 AM | Unregistered CommenterSteve

You aren't freaking me out either.

I prefer the cock up of cover up to any idea of conspiracy in the enquiry.

(I'll recycle my analogy to the Irish Catholic bishops trying to sweep problems with paedophile priests under the carpet: "its an internal church matter, we are carrying out our own investigation, Fr X is a very well respected and active parish priest, an excellent and very popular preacher and very effective fund raiser....").

You'd think McIntyre would have been the first person they'd have spoken to, but he says the only person whose contacted him is an anti terrorist policeman.

Keith

Feb 2, 2010 at 11:45 AM | Unregistered CommenterKeith

It does seem remiss of the Penn State inquiry not to call obvious prosecution witnesses but thats politics for you!

Feb 2, 2010 at 11:57 AM | Unregistered CommenterAJC

Did anyone ever see the terms of reference of the Penn State "inquiry"

Feb 2, 2010 at 12:02 PM | Unregistered CommenterAndyL

I believe that the Penn State inquiry is operating by their standard misconduct rules and will only "determine if he violated university policy and if the university should further investigate Mann's work".

Remember that he has only been at Penn State since 2005 so they will presumably ignore anything before that date unless they believe that he misrepresented his qualification for his current post.

Feb 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM | Unregistered CommenterAJC

"Freaking me out" doesn't begin to explain how I feel about what Michael Mann has done to my Alma Mater. How can anyone accuse a "skeptic" of becoming part of a conspiracy when the whole damn charade of AGW is the biggest money-making conspiracy of all time? Sheesh.

Feb 2, 2010 at 2:00 PM | Unregistered Commenterdfbaskwill

In time, this will come back to haunt Penn State. This whole anti-AGW movement is slowly gathering steam.

What every one of these idiots forget is this in NOT 1990. This is 2010 and there is a very critical difference -- blogs. People talk and spread information.

Feb 2, 2010 at 3:31 PM | Unregistered CommenterDon Pablo de la Sierra

I suspect Muir Russell, still smarting from his feeble management of the building of the Holyrood House of Horrors, and his feeble display at the public enquiry which followed it, is somewhat alarmed at the attention this topic is still receiving. He will be consulting madly with scientific charlatans in and around the Royal Societies of Edinburgh and London (key collaborators in the scam, and no doubt with friends, and not only funders, in high places) to find out the line he is to take, and the tactics. We little people, poor punters on the sidelines, must seek our amusement while we can and where we may. Muir Russell purporting to head up an 'independent' inquiry will be a source of merriment too good to miss. Meanwhile our fuel bills will soar, our industries will founder, and our children will be dispirited. The best thing that could ever be said of the climate conspirators may turn out to be 'they knew not what they did'. But I think that is not true. I think their behaviour is unforgivable.

Well done with your book, by the way. An excellent contribution.

Feb 2, 2010 at 5:38 PM | Unregistered CommenterFrank S

check out the dead man musings conspiracy forum!

Feb 2, 2010 at 6:25 PM | Unregistered Commenterchris

AndyL

"Did anyone ever see the terms of reference of the Penn State "inquiry"".

The terms of reference of these things are always the small print you have to read. It can explain why despite the evidence uncovered, they can come to perverse conclusions. Then there's the question of how rigidly the inquiry allows itself to be confined by the terms of reference.

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2009/11/30/psu_investigates_climategate.aspx

The title of that piece is, "PSU investigates 'Climategate'", but reading further, it may not be entirely accurate. It could just be that they're investigating whether Mann has broken PSU policy, and he's only been there since 2005. If an organisation has a policy, what exactly the policy is and what constitutes a breach, is bound to be a matter of interpretation.

The article says it's an inquiry to determine whether a further inquiry is necessary.

When a body investigates itself, it's easy to believe there's a bias to sweep things under the carpet.

Feb 2, 2010 at 6:36 PM | Unregistered Commentercosmic

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>