Bishop Hill Inhofe demands investigation of Mann
Feb 23, 2010 Climate: Mann James Inhofe, uber-sceptic senator from Oklahoma, has called for an investigation of Michael Mann.
Just prior to a hearing at 10:00 a.m. EST, Senator Inhofe released a minority staff report from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, of which he is ranking member. Senator Inhofe is asking the Department of Justice to investigate whether there has been research misconduct or criminal actions by the scientists involved, including Dr. Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University and Dr. James Hansen of Columbia University and the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Science.
If this happens it could be quite interesting. Inhofe is pointing at major issues that are not really being touched elsewhere, such as the pressurising of scientific journals. It would be interesting to see if the Senate could get people like Famiglietti and Saiers to explain exactly what went on at Geophysical Research Letters when McIntyre and McKitrick's 2005 paper was submitted.
Reader Comments (10)
It's good to hear talk of criminal actions. Maybe the threat will encourage defections and whistle-blowers.
Playing the Mann, and not the ball?
Since large sums of U.S. taxpayers money have been strewn around to pay for much of this merriment, there is a rich legal seam to be mined here. Acronyms like RICO spring to mind, very wide ranging.
I hope his comments about the standard of science are going to be repeated by Lord Lawson on Monday.
See. It's them Yanks. Told you. My Phil never done nuffink wrong. 'e's a good boy, 'e is.
Prof Jones's mum,
You're killing me.
Don't ever stop.
This is great.
At first, based on the headlines, I feared Imhofe was going too narrow in focus. He is not.
This is a broad range strategic move to put heat on every aspect of the misuse of science and federal funding of that science.
Don't expect the Justice Department to come down with indictments, they are too politicized. However the Media will not be able to continue to ignore the questions raised, and neither will the Administration. Certainly the political constituency will ask inconvenient questions of their elected.
First step: Nullify the EPA.
Good Link for the overview:
http://dailycaller.com/2010/02/23/inhofe-calls-for-investigation-of-researcher-michael-mann/
Currently reading the minority report. What weight does this carry in the US political system?
I just posted this on CA but think that it should also be asked in this forum.
"For British readers who are familiar with how UK Parliamentary inquiries operate: Is there a way to use the Minority Report on the CRU controversy that was just released by the US Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee to apply pressure on the UK inquiry to take a broader view of the scope of inquiry? It is available on WUWT at wattsupwiththat.com/2010/02/23/climategate-minority-report/#more-16658"
I'll be taking a copy to one inquiry member later in the week as they're my MP.
These moves are in the right direction.
We need a thorough legal or parliamentary enquiry into the whole matter on the broadest front.
It is essential that expert witnesses are called and that the enquiry (in whatever form) has really expert advice on hand and steering the questions.
It is so easy for people not familiar with the evidnece first hand, to be bamboozled.