A Bit of Justice for a Canadian Climate Scientist
Apparently, I grossly misinterpreted the words of Thomas Fuller whom I quoted below. Accordingly, I preface the following article with the following:
I have to ask if you can be factually correct about anything after your misquote of me. The words you think I am using to attack Michael Mann were actually part of an open letter to Ken Cuccinelli, who was trying to prosecute Mann. …and in a post about libel… what a maroon.
Open Letter to Mr. Cuccinelli, Attorney General
Sir, As co-author of a book (Climategate: The CRUtape Letters) that was harshly critical of the performance of Michael Mann and his colleagues, I write in criticism of your decision to investigate Mr. Mann for potential violations of state laws on fraudulent payment of claims.
Mr. Mann has been extensively investigated regarding his work product, and although I consider his actions to be often unprofessional and politically oriented, neither I nor any of the people interviewed for our book have any doubt whatsoever that Mann performed the scientific work he has been commissioned to do, or that he engaged in any fraudulent actions.
No matter what has prompted your investigation, there is no doubt that it will be interpreted as a witch hunt. If you are in fact investigating a credentialed scientist for results that do not suit your political opinion, that interpretation is correct. Unless you can reveal to the public prima facie evidence that shows cause for this investigation, I beg you to reconsider. There are ample avenues of professional and academic recourse for people like me who think he has done something wrong. But being wrong is not a crime, and intimidating scientists not a path that this country, including I presume Virginians, should ever pursue. You may consult with colleagues in Salem to determine how long it takes to live this type of thing down.
Sincerely,
Thomas Fuller
Readers who may be following the personal attacks on climate scientists who make assertions about the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) are most likely familiar with Dr. Michael Mann (pictured), arguably the poster child for this phenomenon. From ThinkProgress:
Michael Mann’s defamation suit against Mark Steyn and the National Review took another step forward last month, with D.C. Superior Court Judge Frederick Weisberg again rejecting a motion to dismiss the suit….Mann sued Steyn, National Review, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), and CEI analyst Randy Simberg in 2012 over what he claims are defamatory articles accusing him of academic fraud and comparing him to a convicted child molester, former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky. (Simberg called Mann “the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except that instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data.”) (more…)
