[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Consequences of Mild, Moderate & Severe Plagiarism Plagiarism: 5 Potential Legal Consequences When Philadelphia’s Foul-Mouthed Cop-Turned-Mayor Invented White Identity Politics Trump Wanted to Pardon Assange and Snowden. Blocked by RINOs. What The Pentagon Is Planning Against Trump Will Make Your Blood Run Cold Once Revealed How Trump won the Amish vote in Pennsylvania FEC Filings Show Kamala Harris Team Blew Funds On Hollywood Stars, Private Jets Israel’s Third Lebanon War is underway: What you need to know LEAK: First Behind-The-Scenes Photos Of Kamala After Getting DESTROYED By Trump | Guzzling Wine!🍷 Scott Ritter Says: Netanyahu's PAINFUL Stumble Pushes Tel Aviv Into Its WORST NIGHTMARE These Are Trump's X-Men | Dr. Jordan B. Peterson Houthis (Yemen) Breached THAAD. Israel Given a Dud Defense!! Yuma County Arizona Doubles Its Outstanding Votes Overnight They're Stealing the Race from Kari Lake Trump to withdraw U.S. troops from northern Syria Trump and RFK created websites for the people to voice their opinion on people the government is hiring Woke Georgia DA Deborah Gonzalez pummeled in re-election bid after refusing Laken Riley murder case Trump has a choice: Obliterate Palestine or end the war Rod Blagojevich: Kamala’s Corruption, & the Real Cause of the Democrat Party’s Spiral Into Insanity Israel's Defense Shattered by Hezbollah's New Iranian Super Missiles | Prof. Mohammad Marandi Trump Wins Arizona in Clean Sweep of Swing States in US Election TikTok Harlots Pledge in Droves: No More Pussy For MAGA Fascists! Colonel Douglas Macgregor:: Honoring Veteran's Day Low-Wage Nations? Trump to pull US out of Paris climate agreement NYT Pixar And Disney Animator Bolhem Bouchiba Sentenced To 25 Years In Prison Six C-17s, C-130s deploy US military assets to Northeastern Syria SNL cast members unveil new "hot jacked" Trump character in MAGA-friendly cold open Here's Why These Geopolitical And Financial Chokepoints Need Your Attention... Former Army Chief Moshe Ya'alon Calls for Civil Disobedience to Protest Netanyahu Government The Deep State against Trump

Science/Tech
See other Science/Tech Articles

Title: ClimateGate's Michael Mann Received Stimulus Funds, Media Mum
Source: News Busters
URL Source: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s ... -funds-media-mum#ixzz0ceNXQk9e
Published: Jan 16, 2010
Author: Noel Sheppard
Post Date: 2010-01-16 13:18:50 by farmfriend
Ping List: *Agriculture-Environment*     Subscribe to *Agriculture-Environment*
Keywords: None
Views: 2080
Comments: 200

ClimateGate's Michael Mann Received Stimulus Funds, Media Mum

By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
January 14, 2010 - 09:44 ET

A scientist in the middle of the ClimateGate scandal received economic stimulus funds last June.

As NewsBusters reported on November 28, Penn State University is investigating Professor Michael Mann, the creator of the discredited "Hockey Stick Graph," for his involvement in an international attempt to exaggerate and manipulate climate data in order to advance the myth of manmade global warming.

According to the conservative think tank the National Center for Public Policy Research, Mann received $541,184 in economic stimulus funds last June to conduct climate change research.

With this in mind, NCPPR issued a press release Thursday asking for these funds to be returned:

In the face of rising unemployment and record-breaking deficits, policy experts at the National Center for Public Policy Research are criticizing the Obama Administration for awarding a half million dollar grant from the economic stimulus package to Penn State Professor Michael Mann, a key figure in the Climategate controversy.

"It's outrageous that economic stimulus money is being used to support research conducted by Michael Mann at the very time he’s under investigation by Penn State and is one of the key figures in the international Climategate scandal. Penn State should immediately return these funds to the U.S. Treasury," said Tom Borelli, Ph.D., director of the National Center's Free Enterprise Project.

Professor Mann is currently under investigation by Penn State University because of activities related to a closed circle of climate scientists who appear to have been engaged in agenda-driven science. Emails and documents mysteriously released from the previously-prestigious Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom revealed discussions of manipulation and destruction of research data, as well as efforts to interfere with the peer review process to stifle opposing views. The motivation underlying these efforts appears to be a coordinated strategy to support the belief that mankind's activities are causing global warming. [...] The $541,184 grant is for three years and was initiated in June 2009.

Potentially adding insult to injury, Penn State received additional stimulus funds to investigate the impact of climate change last week:

A nearly $1.9 million grant from the National Science Foundation is enabling a Penn State-led group of researchers to continue studies on the potential effects of climate change on the spread of infectious diseases, such as malaria and dengue. The grant is part of federal stimulus funding authorized under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

This grant appears to have nothing to do with Mann's department. However, given the high-profile the university is currently under as a result of his involvement in ClimateGate, it seems absurd that any federal funds involving climate change would be going to this school while it is investigating its chief proponent of this myth.

Maybe more importantly, why are economic stimulus funds being given to a university for scientific research in the first place, especially one with such political overtones?

As NCPPR noted in its release:

"It's no wonder that Obama's stimulus plan is failing to produce jobs. Taxpayer dollars aren't being used in the ways most likely to spur job creation. The stimulus was not sold to the public as a way to reward a loyalist in the climate change debate. Nor was the stimulus sold as a way to promote the Obama Administration's position on the global warming theory...As is often the case, political considerations corrupt the distribution of government funds," said Deneen Borelli, a fellow with the National Center's Project 21 black leadership network.

Despite the obviously controversial nature of this funding and its recipient, I can identify absolutely no media coverage concerning the matter.

I'm sure now that NCPPR has exposed this hypocrisy, press outlets across the fruited plain will be aggressively investigating economic stimulus grants to Mann and others involved in the ClimateGate scandal in order to inform the public about how their tax dollars are being spent.

Of course, I'm not holding my breath. Subscribe to *Agriculture-Environment*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 25.

#1. To: farmfriend (#0)

ClimateGate's Michael Mann Received Stimulus Funds, Media Mum

I see allegations, but no proof.

There are embedded links in the article but in following them, no proof of that grant is presented. I won't just take someones word for it.

http://www.nationalcenter.org/PR-Michael_Mann_Money_011410.html mentions it too, and it was credited as a source in this article. No proof though.

PSUSA  posted on  2010-01-16   13:47:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

The article was written by Noel Sheppard who is above reproach in my book.

farmfriend  posted on  2010-01-16   14:19:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

NewsBusted: The Sheppard File, Global Warming Division NewsBusters' Noel Sheppard posts claims attacking global warming that hide the agendas of those critics and ignore the full story.

By Terry Krepel Posted 6/21/2007

We know that NewsBusters blogger Noel Sheppard is eager to mislead and smear on many topics, so it's no surprise that global warming is one of them.

Indeed, Sheppard has issued dozens of posts on the subject. But many of them either baselessly attack global warming proponents or downplay or ignore the flaws in anti-global warming arguments or the dubious records of their promoters. Bashing Gore

Needless to say, chief among Sheppard's targets is Al Gore, whom he regularly insults. Bashing a Washington Post article about Gore's unusual path from failed presidential candidate to subject of the award-winning film "An Inconvenient Truth" and chief advocate of a response to global warming, Sheppard declared in a Feb. 25 post that the article was "sickening," asserting that "the text despicably read like a tabloid story about Britney Spears' shaved head or Elvis sightings in Las Vegas," finally sneering, "Had enough? I have. Those that are interested can read the rest at their own risk. I’ve got to go wash my hands, and disinfect my keyboard."

In a Feb. 26 post, Sheppard called "An Inconvenient Truth" a "schlockumentary" (an epithet he had used earlier in a Jan. 23 post, adding that it was a "farcical political advertisement") and after excerpting a section of Gore's Oscar acceptance speech, he added: "Can someone point me in the direction of the nearest water closet?" In the comments section, Sheppard elaborated: "He's a charlatan who doesn't believe in anything but himself and attaining power. And, he's commiting a fraud on the population for his own benefit, not yours, and certainly not mine." Sheppard offered no evidence to support this claim.

A Feb. 19 post by Sheppard regurgitated Fox News host Sean Hannity's attack on Al Gore for purportedly not be as "carbon-neutral" as he has proclaimed himself to be. But as NewsHounds pointed out, Hannity conflated "global warming" with "climate change" and confused "carbon imprint" with "carbon neutrality." Hannity's complaint that flying in a private jet, which he claims that Gore prefers, "does more than four times the carbon emission damage to the environment than flying a regular commercial jet" falls hollow given Hannity's own taste for the Gulfstream lifestyle, something Sheppard failed to note. Further, as Wonkette added, if there is no such thing as human-based global warming, as Sheppard appears to believe, how can Gore be causing it? Dubious track records ignored

Sheppard's chief tactic is to uncritically repeat any suggestion that counters the idea that humans cause global warming without noting any potential problems in those claims.

In a May 22 post, Sheppard promoted, as he had previously, the British film "The Great Global Warming Swindle," which according to Sheppard "presents the other side of the climate change debate the media and folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore don’t want you to hear." But Sheppard did not mention dubious claims in the film and others made by its director, Martin Durkin. Media Matters reported that, in an April 25 article in the UK's Scotsman, the film is "under fire" for claiming "that the world was hotter during the 'Medieval Warm Period' based on a graph that ended in 1975, and that volcanoes produce more carbon dioxide than humans."According to one study, volcanoes produce about 2 per cent of the emissions from human use of fossil fuels." According to Media Matters, Durkin made a film in 1999 which argued that silicone implants reduce the incidence of breast cancer, as well as a 1997 Channel 4 series called "Against Nature" that, according to The Guardian, "compared environmentalists ... to Nazis, conspiring against the world's poor" and caused the UK's Independent Television Commission to "hand down one of the most damning verdicts it has ever reached: the programme makers 'distorted by selective editing' the views of the interviewees and 'misled' them about the 'content and purpose of the programmes when they agreed to take part'. Channel 4 was forced to make a humiliating prime time apology." Related articles on ConWebWatch: NewsBusted Going to Extremes Swing to the Right The Disconnect, Part 2: The End of the Affair NewsBusted: The Finkelstein File NewsBusted: The Sheppard File Lies, Conservatives and Statistics: Marc Morano's Fantasy

In a March 21 post, Noel Sheppard signed on to do the bidding of global warming-bashing Sen. James Inhofe by reliably regurgitating Inhofe's press release claiming that, during his Senate testimony about global warming, Al Gore "refused" to take Inhofe's "Personal Energy Ethics Pledge," in which he demanded that Gore "consume no more energy for use in [his] residence than the average American household by March 21, 2008." In fact, Inhofe, apparently forgetting that he was no longer a committee chairman, repeatedly interrupted Gore as he tried to answer Inhofe's demand that he take the pledge -- one Inhofe showed no evidence of following himself, by the way -- as he explained his purchase of wind energy and other green energy that does not produce carbon dioxide, his efforts to be "carbon neutral" and to install solar panels at his home, all of which meets Inhofe's requirement of "reducing ... fossil fuel-based home energy usage."

A March 16 post declared that global warming skeptics "beat the believers" in a debate. Sheppard's source for this claim? A post by Inhofe's director of communications, Marc Morano, not exactly an objective source. Morano, by the way, is a former CNSNews.com reporter who is best known as the co-author of a 2006 hit piece on Rep. John Murtha. (Shortly before leaving CNS for Inhofe, he promoted the allegations of disgraced ex-NASA spokesman George Deutsch -- who was resigned his post after it was revealed that he had not graduated from college as his resume claimed -- in an attempt to discredit NASA global warming scientist James Hansen.)

A March 12 post repeated a New York Times article on global warming skeptics, commenting: "Amazing. The New York Times is suggesting that Dr. Gore might have exaggerated his claims and gone beyond scientific evidence? Somebody other than Punch should pinch me." But as Media Matters detailed, several of the skeptics cited in the Times article have have records of misinformation on the issue.

A March 19 NewsBusters post by Sheppard touted (along with CNSNews.com and NewsMax) a challenge by Lord Monckton, "a former advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher," to Al Gore to hold "an internationally televised, head-to-head, nation-unto-nation confrontation on the question, 'That our effect on climate is not dangerous.' " But Sheppard doesn't tell us the rest of the story: According to The Raw Story website, Lord Monckton (aka Christopher Monckton, Viscount Monckton of Brenchley) has no scientific credentials, holding degrees only in classics and journalism. So why is he in any way authoritative on the issue of global warming? His apparent main claim to fame is a lengthy article in the British paper the Telegraph claiming that, in the words of British Guardian columnist George Monbiot, "climate change is a hoax perpetrated by a leftwing conspiracy coordinated by the United Nations." Monbiot calls Monckton's article "a mixture of cherry-picking, downright misrepresentation and pseudo-scientific gibberish," adding, "There is scarcely a line in Lord Monckton's paper which is not wildly wrong."

A March 1 NewsBusters post by Sheppard misrepresented an anti-global warming theory as mainstream when, in fact, it's merely one man's idea. In what he called an "absolutely startling report about climate change," Sheppard cited a National Geographic News report on a claim by Russian scientist Habibullo Abdussamatov that global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun, not by man. While Sheppard did excerpt a segment of the article calling it "one scientist's controversial theory," he went on to state, without offering evidence, that "To be sure, Abdussamatov is not the first scientist to make this claim."

However, Sheppard was vague in describing the criticism of the theory in the article: "In a piece that debunked what the supposed consensus believes on this issue, the magazine spent almost the bulk of the space alloted citing scientists that don’t buy Abdussamatov’s conclusions starting with, 'Abdussamatov's work, however, has not been well received by other climate scientists.' " But Sheppard did not detail the specific -- and serious -- criticisms of Abdussamatov's theory contained in the article. Chief among them: Not only did Abdussamatov apparently fail to take into account changes in Mar's orbit and tilt that would affect changes in Mars' climate, the article adds: "Perhaps the biggest stumbling block in Abdussamatov's theory is his dismissal of the greenhouse effect, in which atmospheric gases such as carbon dioxide help keep heat trapped near the planet's surface." Hidden backgrounds

To nobody's surprise, Sheppard used NewsBusters posts on May 3 and May 4 to tout claims made by various global warming skeptics during CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck's anti-global warming special. Also to no one's surprise, Sheppard doesn't say a thing about the energy industry links and previous misleading claims made by those same skeptics Beck featured in his special.

One of them is Timothy Ball, whose claims Sheppard touted in posts on Feb. 5 and Feb. 14. But as the DeSmog Blog noted, despite promoting himself as "the first Canadian PhD in Climatology," the record suggests a paucity of published scholarly research on the subject. Another entry makes the point clearer, claiming that "Dr. Ball has not published any research in a peer-reviewed science journal in the last 20 years."

Another is Bjorn Lomborg, whose claims Sheppard noted in his May 4 post. As Media Matters noted, Lomborg wrote a book that purported to conduct a "non-partisan analysis" of environmental data, concluding that claims about global warming were overblown. But in January 2002, Scientific American ran a series of articles from four well-known environmental specialists that lambasted Lomborg's book for "egregious distortions," "elementary blunders of quantitative manipulation and presentation that no self-respecting statistician ought to commit," and sections that were "poorly researched and ... rife with careless mistakes."

A June 5 post by Sheppard claimed that the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change -- which published a "detailed analysis" attacking claims by NASA's James Hansen about "a dire global warming future" -- is a "scientific organization." Sheppard adds: "Think this study will get much air or print space tonight or tomorrow? Neither do I." Nowhere does Sheppard mention the main reason the study will not get the attention he thinks it deserves -- the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change has close ties to the energy industry, which typically funds global warming skeptics like the Center. The organization's principals -- Sherwood Idso and his sons, Craig and Keith, have all worked for the Western Fuels Association, a cooperative that supplies coal and transportation services to consumer-owned electric utilities in the western United States. Further, the organization has received $90,000 from ExxonMobil Corp. between 1998 and 2005. Sherwood Idso has defended receiving such funding, insisting that "the mere existence of funding, whether from private or public sources, does not, in and of itself, prove malfeasance on the part of the funds' recipients" (italics his). ExxonSecrets.org, though, reported that the Center "does not reveal its funding sources," which makes it difficult to judge whether how believeable Idso is on this subject. Bogus 'state climatologists'

In a Feb. 7 post, Sheppard touted the case of Oregon "state climatologist" George Taylor, who was to be stripped of his "job" because he didn't "buy into the junk science of anthropogenic global warming." In fact, as Think Progress reported, there's no official Oregon "state climatologist," Taylor is not trained in climatology, and losing the honorary title will not cost him any income or his current job as a college instructor. (WorldNetDaily's Craige McMillan and CNSNews.com also repeated the bogus claims about Taylor's position.)

In a Feb. 23 post -- after citing the bogus claim about the Oregon "state climatologist" -- he repeated an article claiming that Delaware's "state climatologist," David Legates, has been ordered by the governor to "stop using his title in public statements on climate change." Sheppard added by way of weak qualification, "I haven’t been able to identify how long Legates has held this title, but it doesn’t appear to have been given to him by her." In fact, according to the newspaper article he cited (but doesn't include in his excerpt for his post), the "state climatologist" position carries no state salary or authority.

buckeroo  posted on  2010-01-16   17:04:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I see nothing there other that unsubstantiated smears which take opinions then try to twist them into factual inaccuracies without once producing a factual inaccuracy.

In other words a hit piece aimed at attacking Mr. Sheppard's credibility. Convincing only to the weak of mind and true beeeeeeeeelievers in Glowbull Warming which is essentially an identity.

Nowhere in that smear piece is there anything which factually refutes the stipulated facts in the article on this thread.

Is Professor Michael Mann of Penn State under investigation for forging evidence? Yes or No?

Was he, or was he not, given a half million dollar grant by the Oh'bummer maladministration? Yes or No?

The article you posted is nothing more than an Argumentum Ad Hominem attack on Mr. Sheppard.

Your posting of it is nothing more than a Red Herring.

Original_Intent  posted on  2010-01-16   17:25:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Sheppard is nothing more than an anti-Gore fanatic. The punk has no credentials other than being a wise-ass on Internet blogs. BFD.

buckeroo  posted on  2010-01-16   17:35:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Sheppard is nothing more than an anti-Gore fanatic.

And there is something wrong with being "anti-Gore"? He is a freakin' liar whose film, if it were shown in England, had to have disclaimers about the inaccuracies it contains.

"...In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that 1.) The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument. 2.) If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination. 3.) Eleven inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.

How marvelous. And what are those inaccuracies?

* The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government's expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.

* The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.

* The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that it was "not possible" to attribute one-off events to global warming.

* The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that this was not the case.

* The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.

* The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant's evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.

* The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.

* The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.

* The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.

* The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.

* The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/10/09/court-identifies-eleven-inaccuracies-al-gore-s-inconvenient-truth#ixzz0colvOiAc

Credentials or not, he has your boy's number.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2010-01-16   17:48:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

And there is something wrong with being "anti-Gore"?

You betcha sweet booties there is. At least Gore pushed an important issue confronting ALL of us. Now, I don't agree with Gore on many attributes; but we can't dismiss the nexus or the focus of attention.

Agreeing with some crack-pot "anti-Gore" sentiment makes you look like a climber. You are too funny and indeed I think you are so full of BS, it makes Al Gore look like an innocent angel.

buckeroo  posted on  2010-01-16   18:00:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

At least Gore pushed an important issue confronting ALL of us. Now, I don't agree with Gore on many attributes; but we can't dismiss the nexus or the focus of attention.

Al Gore pushed that bs "global warming" hoax to line his own pockets. Most people have that figured out but some people take longer to catch on than others. Maybe you will catch on someday. As for your opinion about how full of bs I am, that is like Madeline Albright, Rosa de Lauro or Bella Abzug calling someone ugly. Not anything that most folks would take seriously.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2010-01-16   19:42:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#31. To: James Deffenbach (#25) (Edited)

Al Gore pushed that bs "global warming" hoax to line his own pockets

Who says otherwise? The REAL issue is the world's climate is changing. Government can't do much about it other than making a few people feel good while they all die of starvation and thirst.

But you already knew that, correct? So you bury your head in the sand ignoring the fact that the world is dying. Too cool. Either you are too god-damned lazy to get off the couch or you are too ignorant to [do] much else. Which is it?

buckeroo  posted on  2010-01-16 20:56:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]