Michael Mann Vindicated (Again) Over Climategate

An anonymous reader writes "Michael Mann, a climatologist at Pennsylvania State University, was one of the central figures involved in the 'Climategate' controversy, which saw many private email conversations between researchers posted publicly. Now, an investigation (PDF) by the National Science Foundation has found "no basis to conclude that the emails were evidence of research misconduct or that they pointed to such evidence." Phil Plait points out that other investigations have found similarly that claims of Mann's misconduct took his statements out of context. 'A big claim by the deniers is that researchers were using "tricks" to falsify conclusions about global warming, but the NSF report is pretty clear that's not true. The most damning thing the investigators could muster was that there was "some concern" over the statistical methods used, but that's not scandalous at all; there's always some argument in science over methodology. The vague language of the report there indicates to me this isn't a big deal, or else they would've been specific. The big point is that the data were not faked.'"

Comments

Re:A little late

[idontgno]

Trying to convince them that we need to properly employ the scientific method is like farting in the wind.

OMG, don't do that! Methane is an even more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2! Fart into a bag and bury the bag deep in the earth! Fart sequestration!

Re:A little late

[Layzej]

Science is NEVER settled, it is only through questioning and skepticism that science can progress.

Exactly. This is why we should never trust science, and certainly never take action on climate change.