State of upheaval

Michael Mann's boss at Penn State, Bill Brune, has suddenly announced that he is standing down as head of department. Brune, as readers of Hiding the Decline will know, was a consultant to the Penn State inquiry into Mann's conduct. He also spoke about the inquiry a year or so ago. According to my correspondent, an email was sent out to faculty by the dean of the School of Geosciences, William Easterling. This is is the relevant section:

It is with mixed feelings that I announce Bill Brune's intention to step down as department head effective January 1, 2014, after a stellar 13 year term as Head of Meteorology.  Bill has led the Department through a period of expansion into new and important areas, including eddy flux measurement and modeling, tornado genesis, climate variability and change dynamics, surface-atmosphere interactions, and weather and climate risk.  Outstanding faculty members were recruited into all of those areas under his leadership.  Bill also oversaw the transformation of the Weather Station into the state of the art Joel N. Myers Weather Center.  His reorganization of business operations in the Department now stands as a model for other departments.  Bill led the Department through the first National Research Council ranking of meteorology doctoral programs;  Penn State Meteorology is now ranked among the nation's elite doctoral programs.  Bill is a highly respected atmospheric chemist and currently holds one of EMS' distinguished professorships. He plans to rejoin the faculty to devote more time to his research and teaching.

It could be nothing. But then again it could signify something. Penn State still seems to be in a state of upheaval with the state auditor general calling for an overhall of the university. Meanwhile, there is continuing speculation that the recent firing of the president of Mann's former base at the University of Virginia was linked to climate change controversies.

Another day, another soft interview

Michael Mann is subjected to the kisses, cuddles and general brown-nosed adulation of somebody called Thomas Brookes, who seems to be something to do with the Carbon Brief.

Another Nobel Laureate

In recent weeks, much fun has been had with Michael Mann's claim to be a Nobel laureate.

Readers of Hiding the Decline will recall the story of William Easterling, one of Mann's bosses at Penn State, who "recused" himself from the investigation of the great Mann for personal reasons. As we now know, Easterling continued to direct the inquiry behind the scenes.

It was therefore with some amusement that I chanced upon this video of Easterling.

A happy band of Nobel laureates.

Quote of the day

There are so many areas where there is still real uncertainty, where there is legitimate debate that occurs in good faith. That's expressed in the peer-reviewed literature and in the debates that scientists have with each other at scientific meetings.

Fair-minded promoter of free open debate in the peer reviewed literature, Michael E Mann, quoted at the Atlantic.

While it was easy to make sure that the worst papers . . . didn’t see the light of the day at [Journal of Climate], it was inevitable that such papers might slip through the cracks at GRL.

An apparently unrelated Michael E Mann in the Climategate emails.

Mann sinking

Science Insider reports that Michael Mann is likely to struggle to win his libel case against the National Review.

"Libel lawsuits are not about whether journalism or commentary is misleading or irresponsible," says Peter Canfield, a partner at the Atlanta office of national law firm Dow Lohnes, who has counseled newspapers and other media outlets. "What the lawsuit is about is whether it contains false statements of facts that the authors knew to be false or seriously doubted to be true. That is a very high burden for a plaintiff to bear, particularly with respect to an issue such as this one that is such a hot topic of public debate."

It's unclear whether Mann's case will go to trial. Robert Drechsel, a journalism professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, who focuses on media law, notes that most libel suits never make it to trial, either because the courts dismiss them or the parties settle. If these parties don't settle, then the court must decide whether to hear all or parts of the case.

Double or quits

Anthony reports that Michael Mann has come over all legal, filing a suit for libel against the National Review online and the Competitive Enterprise Institute. And as he correctly notes, the process of legal discovery of documents should be interesting.

The Hockey Stick Story never seems to end, does it?

Mann makes friends

New York Times blogger Nate Silver has a book on forecasting riding high in the Amazon US charts at the moment. The Signal and the Noise is a survey of forecasting, and looks to be thoroughly entertaining. I've asked the publisher for a review copy.

Unfortunately, Silver has stumbled into the murky world of climate prediction, and has incurred the wrath of Michael E Mann, who has printed a lengthy critique at Think Progress. It's a lot milder than your normal Mannian critique, but includes many of the normal tactics. His invoking Silver's training at the University of Chicago as a cause for concern almost defies belief:

Nate Silver was trained in the Chicago school of Economics, famously characterized by its philosophy of free market fundamentalism. In addition to courses from Milton Friedman, Nate might very well have taken a course from University of Chicago economist Steven Levitt, known largely for his provocative 2005 book Freakonomics and its even more audacious 2009 sequel Super Freakonomics.

Silver sounds deeply frustrated, saying that Mann's piece is not a fair critique of what he wrote. I guess he should have read The Hockey Stick Illusion before deciding that Mann was the go-to guy.

The Signal and the Noise can be bought at Amazon US. It will be published in the UK in a couple of days, but they are letting you preorder the Kindle version.

ATI statement on UVa FOI case

This just in from the American Tradition Institute

Yesterday the American Tradition Institute (ATI) participated in more than four hours of oral argument in the Prince William County Circuit Court, in its effort to have faculty emails which were paid for by the taxpayer, in pursuit of taxpayer funded employment, declared public records, declared subject to the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (VFOIA) and released under that Act. The trial-court level judge ruled from the bench, siding with ATI on the first two questions, with the University of Virginia on the third, while rejecting the arguments of intervenor Michael Mann. ATI's comments on this development are as follow.

Click to read more ...

Idle scientists

The pressure put on anyone or anything that doesn't toe the AGW alarmism line is something to behold. As we have seen, the merest hint that Owen Paterson might have doubts on the subject has been enough to provoke a frenzy of campaigning journalism from the BBC and the Guardian.

I've reported in the past on the article at the Chronicle of Higher Education, in which Peter Wood wondered, quite reasonably, if Penn State University's willingness to cover up the Sandusky child abuse affair suggested that they would also find it within themselves to cover up wrongdoing by Michael Mann.

This has now generated the most extraordinary set of letters from Mann's supporters in the academy, each claiming, implausibly, that Wood is trying to suggest that Mann is a child abuser.

Don't they have jobs to do?

Virginia court rules against ATI

I've just had word that the Virginia circuit court has ruled against the American Tradition Institute, declaring that the University of Virginia does not have to release Michael Mann's emails. If I understand it correctly, the ruling is that correspondence between academics is in some way proprietary and therefore it is up to the university whether they release the information.

More once the ruling becomes clearer.

Dellers calls for sceptics to fund Mann's libel battle

James Delingpole calls for sceptics everywhere to fund Michael Mann's legal fight against Mark Steyn and the National Review Online.

I kid you not.

Fighting mad

Another interesting set of emails from the University of Arizona release. These ones date back to 2001, eight or nine months after the publication of the Third Assessment Report. The thread starts on 7 September, just days before 9/11, and reference is made to those attacks in the thread.

The emails show how the Hockey Team came together to attempt to thwart criticism of their field from a German geological institute. The message is from Stefan Rahmstorf to Overpeck:

Subject: Sceptics attack! [Title inferred from later emails in thread]

Hi Jonathan,

I thought the subject line might capture your attention ... but seriously, we're facing a concerted action here at the moment, a German geological institute has launched a well-orchestrated challenge to IPCC including a book launch, cover articles in major newspapers, a simultaneous official request in the Bundestag, etc. They have the coal industry on their side. Not surprising to you in the US I'm sure but a novelty for germany, where so far the sceptics had no ground to stand on.

Click to read more ...

More litigation

This press release has just been issued by the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Penn State Climate Scientist Michael Mann Demands Apology From CEI

CEI Refuses to Retract Commentary

Washington, D.C., August 24, 2012 – The Competitive Enterprise Institute received a letter on August 21 from an attorney representing Penn State University Professor Michael E. Mann that demands that CEI retract and apologize for a post on CEI’s blog, OpenMarket.org, written by CEI adjunct scholar Rand Simberg. The letter also threatens that they "intend to pursue all appropriate legal remedies on behalf of Dr. Mann."

Click to read more ...

More emails

Chris Horner has just had another batch of emails released to him, this time from the University of Arizona, where Hockey Team members Overpeck and Hughes are based. It's early days on the analysis of the content, but one message was sufficiently amusing for him to forward it to me.

Remember this picture?

Click to read more ...

Timmy on Mann

Tim Worstall writes about the (allegedly) forthcoming libel case:

The lawyers defending NR get to crawl all over all those documents that he’s been so careful about making sure have not been released. Now, as we know absolutely, Dr. Mann has not been hiding anything at all, not even the odd decline, in his academic work. All his papers, emails, research and workings are entirely without blemish as is only right and proper for one who has awoken the world to the grave dangers posed by climate change. But it is still true that NR’s lawyers get access to them in order to defend the magazine against the charges that Dr. Mann is bringing. Those entirely righteous charges, you recall, to defend his reputation and honour from the stains being flung at it.