Here’s how the Virgina AG investigation of Michael Mann differs from the Democrat inquisition of climate skeptics

Politico tries making JunkScience sound hypocritical.

Here’s the Politico story.

Here’s our comment on the distinction which Politico sort of mentions but ignores:

1. The Virginia AG demand for Mann’s communications was based on legitimate concern (in the wake of Climategate) about the credibility of Mann’s taxpayer-funded research.

2. The Rep. Grijalva/Sen. Ed Markey demand for records on Soon and other skeptics is an effort to embarrass Soon, other skeptics and their institutions over the private funding of their research – not the credibility of the research itself.

8 thoughts on “Here’s how the Virgina AG investigation of Michael Mann differs from the Democrat inquisition of climate skeptics”

  1. The reason Mann should be investigated is simple:
    If you apply for a mortgage and give false info, you get charged with a crime.
    If you are a climate scientist and you apply for government money by submitting false info, you get grants and awards.
    In a fair world, the Mann case would stop (or slow down) the constant obtaining of money fraudulently by making false climate claims.

    But Politico and the two Democratic politicos don’t want the fraud to stop.

  2. The world is now a dangerous place, because AGW promoters, the UN and Al Gore lost the debate despite almost unlimited access to public funds from crooked politicians and a Nobel Prize for fraudulent climatology.

  3. If your accepting money from special-interest groups makes any position you present or support inherently biased in favor of those special interests and therefore unsupportable, what does this say about every politician in office?

  4. I think you mean “The reason Mann should be investigated for an eight time is simple.” I admit it’s hard to keep track of all the times he’s been exonerated, but you should at least try.

  5. Here’s a different and more supportable interpretation:

    1. The Virginia AG demand for Mann’s communications was an effort to dig up embarrassing dirt on Mann and his institution based on trumped-up propaganda about the credibility of Mann’s taxpayer-funded research, which has been validated by dozens of other peer-reviewed studies and investigated by multiple organizations.

    2. The Rep. Grijalva/Sen. Ed Markey demand for records on Soon and other skeptics is an effort to illuminate the influence on Soon of the private funding of his research (based on his failure to disclose potential conflicts of interest to the journals where he has published) – as well as its relation to the credibility of his generally debunked research itself.

Comments are closed.