Figures. Democrats Move to Block Investigation of Manipulated Global Warming Junk Science Data
Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, January 19, 2011, 6:08 AM
We all knew it was a scam.
Now democrats in Virginia have moved to block an investigation into global warming junk science data.
WTOP reported:
A power struggle is unfolding in Virginia over climate change research.
Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has been taking the University of Virginia to court to get information on a climate change researcher who once worked at the school.
Now several members of the State Assembly say they’ve had enough and have introduced legislation to rein in Cuccinelli’s investigation.
Cuccinelli, a global warming skeptic, is looking into whether UVA professor Michael Mann manipulated data to show that there has been a rapid, recent rise in the Earth’s temperature.
Democratic Sens. Donald McEachin of Henrico and Chap Petersen of Fairfax County say their bills won’t give blanket immunity to colleges to defraud the state, but they would curb politically motivated probes.
McEachin and Petersen, both lawyers, said Cuccinelli had abused the authority the office obtained under a 2002 law.
Their legislation would force Cuccinelli to sue and obtain subpoenas as is required of other civil litigation.
ADVERTISEMENT
`
TheTriGuy commented:
Then get the subpeonas! And then, rub the data (or lack of it) in their smarmy faces. Once you’ve done that, point the finger at them for wanting to block the prosecution of this fraud and wasting taxpayer funds.
Chkn Fryd commented:
Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli has been taking the University of Virginia to court to get information on a climate change researcher who once worked at the school.
Not the data, not the notes, not the conclusions; the top law enforcement officer wants to investigate – THEM! Isn’t this the insidious, not the country I grew up in” thing you wanted liberals to stop? Then STOP! Meanwhile, Democrats ride the rescue of Virginians’ civil liberties.
Chkn Fryd commented:
Sorry, that should read : “not the country I grew up in”
Trish commented:
Of course they will, it’s just another embarrassing lefty obsession that will do more to destroy than save the country!
If they cannot face skeptics and debate them with any facts or reality, then they haven’t got a case anyway.
By blocking the investigation, they essentially admit to the fraud and confirm our suspicions that the data was manipulated to further their religion. Er, cause.
.
Peggy R commented:
Hold on. I don’t think the Dems control the legislature. The Gov and AG are GOP. The Dems can try, but I don’t know that I’d worry too much, unless some GOPers are on board. And the GOP Gov would have to sign the law, which would have to be veto-proof.
Ok, the State Senate is Dem majority, but the House of Delegates is GOP majority.
bg commented:
++
isn’t it a bit too late for that?? /s/
==
mark commented:
There is a lot of money at stake in the global warming game. Certainly Al Gore could be the world’s wealthiest global warming advocate. But a scientist manipulating data in an attempt to perhaps receive additional federal grant money? Come on. That wouldnt’ couldn’t happen. All scientists are fact-based and I’m sure this scientist would want to publish his facts and publish his sources like other scientists. Right? Chirp chirp chirp.
Chkn Fryd commented:
This isn’t a debate, it’s a witch hunt with subpoena power. If you don’t want the government in your science, then stop regulating it. Hell, I’d settle for dueling statistics at twenty paces (may your normal distribution ring true). But the courts are an adversarial setting. It’s not about fairness but getting your own way.
Gee Grandpa, you mean there was a time when Conservatives were afraid of too much police power? WOW!
Andreas K. commented:
Hey chicken, you forgot something.
“Cuccinelli, a global warming skeptic, is looking into whether UVA professor Michael Mann manipulated data to show that there has been a rapid, recent rise in the Earth’s temperature.”
Fact is Mann manipulated the date. The hockey stick has never been reproduced, because it’s not possible to reproduce it. The first who figured that out was a German professor and one of his students. The girl was given the task to recreate the hockey stick as part of the paper she was writing. She soon learned, however, that, even with the data given, she couldn’t recreate it. A couple of other scientists later discovered that, no matter what you enter into Mann’s ridiculous model, you always get the same or similar results. Which then brought out the idea that maybe the result is hardcoded into the model.
And yes, Mann forged the data. The hockey stick ignores the vast majority of data. It doesn’t show the extremely high temperatures 2,000 and ~800 years ago, when the “climate” was actually so hot, that the Romans could plant wine in England and the Danes did the same later in Denmark.
Also, this data and anything around the hockey stick and Mann’s “research” (if we can call his BSing that) would fall under the freedom of information act, especially since the government has jumped on Mann’s train.
BTW, Mann also claimed a significant rise of hurricanes in the Gulf, due to global warming, which was, at once, called BS by the observing scientists.
Mann is a liar and should be stripped of his academic titles.
Rock commented:
Well gee and here I thought that when a crime of fraud was suspected, that one of the tools was to follow the money. Given there is more than sufficient evidence to suggest the push for global warming is more about wealth and power, and less about saving the planet, yea I would want one of the lead scientist investigated. All these chicken little’s screaming the sky is falling, the sky is falling then jetting around the world to push agenda is a load of Dimicrap.
Chkn Sht commented:
If you take government money, or your research is used to create government policy, then you need to provide the methods you used, and be willing to defend the findings of your report. If the science is sound, why not use this as an opportunity to prove that you’ve done good research? It could even lead to additional funding.
gastorgrab commented:
“Dude! If you touch my Junk Science i’m gonna have Eric Holder arrest you.”
bg commented:
++
Chkn Fryd #8
The Death Of The Global Warming Movement
[Future historians will pinpoint Democratic Sen. Harry Reid's energy
legislation, released last Tuesday, as the moment that the political
movement of global warming entered an irreversible death spiral. It
is kaput! Finito! Done!]
rotflmbo!!
==
Chkn Fryd commented:
Love the research and your cordial tone, so let me respond with equal respect:
Mann is a liar and should be stripped of his academic titles. And this doesn’t rise to the level of a crime. If what you say is true, then the school has a civil case against the researcher, and maybe the state has a civil case against the school for misuse of state funds on their watch, at their facilities, and by their personnel.
But at no point does this rise to the level of a crime. So why is law enforcement investigating a civil case involving climate change? Ohhhhhhhhhh, I get it.
So since the IRS has your name, does the government make you disclose everything about you? Yeah, I bet the freedom of information act doesn’t work the way you think it does. Otherwise you should get an investigation into the factual basis for Congressman Joe Wilson’s “You lie!” during the state of the Union. Since you relied on it and all, you deserve the facts.
Chkn Fryd commented:
CS @ 11: Really? Try something more. I can overcome this one with 11 words from W’s state of the Union. Facts, Cheney don’ need no stinkn’ facts.
BG @ 13: I agree. All bad science has got to go. But if bad science is a crime then cigarette executives were on the FBI’s most wanted list 15 years ago.
Don’t like it, don’t use it.
Rock commented:
By Chkn Fryd, it would seem if I mislead the IRS on my actual wealth, by providing inaccurate information to them, I would not be guilty of any crime, other than being a liar. Anyone want to use that logic at a IRS audit?
Militant Conservative commented:
#8 January 19, 2011 at 11:32 am
Chkn Fryd commented:
Three motivations of man: LOVE, MONEY, POWER
The scientists do not love us thier research is paid via government grants. Thus its about money and power.
chkn lips, what is the perfect temperature???? Now, 50 years ago, 100 years ago. How about the CO2?? 78% of atmosphere is nitrogen. 21% is oxygen. That leaves 1% trace gasses, of that 1% .4% is CO2.
IF greenhouse gasses are on the rise why is the CO2 volume not moving??
It’s all a lie to get what is in your pants…..your wallet.
powder is dry.
bg commented:
++
Chkn Fryd #8
Climategate reveals ‘the most influential tree in the world’
[Coming to light in recent days has been one of the most extraordinary scientific detective stories of our time, bizarrely centred on a single tree in Siberia dubbed "the most influential tree in the world". On this astonishing tale, it is no exaggeration to say, could hang in considerable part the future shape of our civilisation. Right at the heart of the sound and fury of "Climategate" – the emails leaked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in East Anglia – is one story of scientific chicanery, overlooked by the media, whose implications dwarf all the rest. If all those thousands of emails and other documents were leaked by an angry whistle-blower, as now seems likely, it was this story more than any other that he or she wanted the world to see.
To appreciate its significance, as I observed last week, it is first necessary to understand that the people these incriminating documents relate to are not just any group of scientists. Professor Philip Jones of the CRU, his colleague Dr Keith Briffa, the US computer modeller Dr Michael Mann, of "hockey stick" fame, and several more make up a tightly-knit group who have been right at the centre of the last two reports of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). On their account, as we shall see at this week's Copenhagen conference, the world faces by far the largest bill proposed by any group of politicians in history, amounting to many trillions of dollars.]
This is one angle of Climategate the national media have noticed.
But they pitch the battle as Cuccinelli vs. Science or Cuccinelli vs.
Academic Freedom.
[What's most infuriating is the notion that it's Cuccinelli who's "politicizing"
science, and not Michael Mann's openly politicized e-mails explaining
his data manipulations and plotting to censor his political opponents.
Somehow, the Union of Concerned Scientists is painted as non-political.]
==
Chkn Sht commented:
WTF are you talking about? The words, “Facts, Cheney don’ need no stinkn’ facts”, don’t appear in any President Bush SOTU address. Non sequitur much?
Chkn Fryd commented:
MC @ 17: You want scientific answers, ask a scientist, not a cop! Bad science is not a crime. And one more thing. Science doesn’t play well in front of a jury. This could just be a smokescreen, where the AG wants to show his credenTEAls but the last thing the AG actually wants to do is go to court.
Dude, I have GOT to get me some of that “powder” of yours. Where does one score such “propellant?” Stay out there, my brother. Nobody does it like you.
`