For those of you who watch only Fox News, you might have missed that the whole "Climategate" thing actually wasn't a "gate"...

Quote:'Climategate' review clears scientists of dishonesty over data

'Rigour and honesty' of scientists not in doubt but Sir Muir Russell says UEA's Climatic Research Unit was not sufficiently open

* David Adam, environment correspondent
* guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 7 July 2010 13.02 BST

The climate scientists at the centre of a media storm were today cleared of accusations that they fudged their results and silenced critics to bolster the case for man-made global warming.

Sir Muir Russell, the senior civil servant who led a six-month inquiry into the affair, said the "rigour and honesty" of the scientists at the world-leading Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) are not in doubt. They did not subvert the peer review process to censor criticism as alleged, the panel found, while key data needed to reproduce their findings was freely available to any "competent" researcher.

The panel did criticise the scientists for not being open enough about their work, and said they were "unhelpful and defensive" when responding to legitimate requests made under freedom of information (FOI) laws.

The row was sparked when 13 years of emails from CRU scientists were hacked and released online last year. Climate change sceptics claimed they showed scientists manipulating and suppressing data to back up a theory of man-made climate change. Critics also alleged that the scientists abused their positions to cover up flaws and distort the peer review process that determines which studies are published in journals, and so enter the scientific record. Some alleged that the emails cast doubt on the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Announcing the findings, Russell said: "Ultimately this has to be about what they did, not what they said."

He added: "The honesty and rigour of CRU as scientists are not in doubt ... We have not found any evidence of behaviour that might undermine the conclusions of the IPCC assessments."

The review is the third and final inquiry into the email affair, dubbed "climategate", and effectively clears Professor Phil Jones, head of the CRU, and his colleagues of the most serious charges. Questions remain over the way in which they responded to requests for information from people outside the conventional scientific arena, some of whom were long-standing critics of Jones.

"We do find that there has been a consistent pattern of failing to display the proper degree of openness, both on the part of CRU scientists and on the part of the UEA," the report, commissioned by UEA, said.

It also criticised the CRU scientists for failing to include proper labels on a 1999 graph prepared for the World Meteorological Organisation, which was the subject of an infamous email about Jones using a "trick" to "hide the decline". The panel said the result was misleading, though they accepted this was not deliberate as the necessary caveats had been included in the report text.

Separately, it was announced today that Phil Jones has accepted the new post of director of research at CRU. The vice chancellor of UEA, Professor Edward Acton, said this was "not a demotion but a shift in emphasis of role" for Phil Jones. "CRU will be more closely integrated in the bigger school of environmental sciences and a key difference is to place some of the administrative burden that Phil had before this incident on the head of the school," said Prof Acton. Jones will be more free to direct and conduct his own research.

Future FOI requests for the CRU will be directed though the head of the school, Professor Jacquie Burgess, and the ultimate responsibility for such requests will lie with the vice-chancellor, as highlighted in the Russell report.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/20...dishonesty

And this...

Quote:Climategate Scientist Cleared in Inquiry, Again
An academic inquiry cleared climate scientist Michael Mann of any academic misconduct arising from leaked e-mails

By Douglas Fischer and The Daily Climate

A Pennsylvania State University investigation has found no substance behind allegations of academic misconduct by climate researcher Michael Mann, one of the central figures in the so-called 'Climategate' e-mail scandal.

It is the third formal inquiry to clear scientists involved in the scandal, which publicized more than 1,000 private e-mails from scientists expressing doubts about their data, refusing to share information and questioning the work of others.

The Penn State findings, released Thursday by a panel of five senior faculty members, concluded Mann never participated in research or other scholarly activity that "deviated from accepted practices within the academic community."

"We consider this issue closed," said university spokeswoman Lisa Powers.

The e-mails were purloined from a server at the University of East Anglia in Britain, one of the most respected climate research centers in the world, and posted on the Web in November, just before the United Nations climate talks in Copenhagen got underway. Critics seized on the correspondence as evidence scientists, including Mann, were cooking their books to emphasize society's role in climate disruption.

"The scientists have been exonerated," Mann said in an interview. "The science behind human-caused climate change is solid. This really is a problem that we need to confront."

Penn State investigated four charges of misconduct raised again Mann stemming from the e-mails: That he allegedly suppressed or falsified data; deleted or concealed e-mails and data; misused confidential information; and deviated from accepted academic practices.

In January the university cleared Mann of the first three charges but concluded the fourth - academic misconduct - merited further investigation.

The five faculty members conducting the follow-up investigation were unanimous in concluding this fourth charge, too, was unfounded.

"Obviously the topic of climate change and climate research is one of great debate," said Powers. "From our perspective we have done due diligence... Academic misconduct does not happen very often, and when it does, we consider it to be a very serious matter."

The university, Powers added, receives $765 million annually in research money. "We would not put our reputation at risk over a single researcher. Our expectations are very high."

For Mann, a professor of meteorology and director of Penn State's Earth System Science Center, the six-month ordeal was simply a "distraction." It kept him from research and teaching, but it also comes with the territory: Allegations of misconduct and impropriety, he said, will continue to dog climate researchers.

"I don't doubt for a minute that the climate-change deniers will continue their campaign of disinformation and smear. That's all they've got left," he said.

This is not the first time Mann has been down this path.

In 2005, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, called Mann before Congress to testify about his now ubiquitous "hockey-stick" graph, showing temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere over the past millennia, with an abrupt spike upward at the end showing human influence on the climate. The hearing sparked a National Research Council investigation, which confirmed the data behind the graph.

In mid-July a fourth panel, headed by Muir Russell, a retired British civil servant, is expected to release its conclusions on the professional behavior of scientists identified in the Climategate e-mails.

And a separate investigation by Virginia's attorney general into Mann's activities while at the University of Virginia remains underway. Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli questions whether Mann defrauded taxpayers when he accepted five grants worth almost $500,000; he has asked the school to turn over all correspondence between Mann and other scientists. The University of Virginia is fighting the request.

Cuccinelli spokesman Brian Gottstein declined to comment on how Penn State's findings may influence the agency's effort. "All of our commentary will be presented in our July 13 reply brief in court," he said in an e-mail.

Mann is confident these efforts to discredit scientists and undermine climate science will ultimately be judged harshly by history.

"They will continue to attack the science and the scientist," he said. "But I believe that as (the evidence) becomes increasingly compelling, as the public continues to understand that climate change is already unfolding ... we will look back with scorn at those who denied climate change."

"All they did, by muddying the water and confusing the public, is delay action to the point where necessary work to mitigate the effects is more expensive."

http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...print=true

A fraud cleared by other frauds...color me unsurprised.

for those who read only Pravda and the Guardian....

wait. i've already clubbed my quota of baby seals.

nevermind.

And in other news, Mussolini "misunderstood" according to fascist historical society.

(07-10-2010 09:10 AM)Eastside_J Wrote:  And in other news, Mussolini "misunderstood" according to fascist historical society.