Oh, and I love this little tidbit.
Quote:
|
In addition to being cleared by the National Academies of Science, Mann's work was cleared by a chief critic. Keith Briffa, a University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit scientist, initially questioned the hockey stick being included in the 2001 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report because it conflicted with his tree ring data findings. Briffa now agrees that Mann's findings, including the sharp increase in temperatures in the late twentieth century, are correct.
|
Oh, let's see. A scientist who worked at a
now-discredited university (because that university published fabricated results, misrepresented data, moved to suppress dissenting voices from being published by scientific publications, and resisted repeated Freedom of Information Act requests by their government concerning AGW) defends this fraudster Michael Mann. And the website calls on its true believers to contact the VA attorney general's office to tell them to quit "harassing" this fraud, because using the power of law enforcement to prosecute fraud is somehow "chilling" to this "scientific community."
Quote:
|
Scientific misconduct does occasionally occur, but the responsibility for policing that misconduct should reside with other scientific experts, such as journal editors, university colleagues or the National Academies of Science.
|
Not when you drag government funding into it, buster. Once government funding is brought into the picture, scientific misconduct becomes
fraud.