Wow here are some of the classy comments:

Most educated people understand that scientific knowledge is based on use of the Scientific Method. The Scientific Method dictates considering ALL hypotheses and testing them, trying to prove them FALSE.

Instead, Mann and his co-conspirators have one hypothesis, unsupported by any evidence, that they have tried for 20+ years to prove TRUE.

The Scientific Method also requires sharing data and processing methods. Mann and followers of his “cause” (as he refers to it in the ClimateGate2 emails have broken the FOIA laws, as well as spurned open science.

I have a Ph.D. in Meteorology, with a graduate minor in E.E. My dissertation research was in the propagation of electromagnetic energy through the atmosphere. Prof Mann’s “expertise” is in counting tree rings - whose declining width had to be hidden in his hockey stick. It’s nonsense.

The man is an anti-scientist.

11 Recommendations

Unsupported by ANY EVIDENCE. I think we need to be asking who the real anti-scientist is here.

Mann is like a poisonous snake — very dangerous when hidden from sight but not so much when pulled out into the light of day. His “science” was long ago discredited and the Climategate releases have exposed how he and his fellow travelers have tried to rig the game against their critics. The “global warming” moment is crumbling and it would be “before our eyes” if not for the cover provided by the media and governments.

12 Recommendations

Transparency is required by the Scientific Method. Without transparency, other scientists cannot replicate experiments.

Mr. Mann has refused to allow other scientists to see his data, methodologies, code, and metadata since publishing his [MBH98] paper – thirteen YEARS ago, despite repeated requests.

Mann hides his data for only one reason: if he shared it with other scientists it would be promptly falsified. Mann’s scientific misconduct is based on fraud. He is a scientific charlatan; the Elmer Gantry of the global warming scare. Even the UN/IPCC can no longer publish Mann’s fraudulent “Hockey Stick” chart, because it has been so thoroughly debunked. Yet, the taxpaying public is still forced to fund federal grants in the $billions every year to “study climate change”.

Mann has plenty to answer for, and kudos to prosecutor Ken Cuccinelli for going after him for his reprehensible climate fraud.

14 Recommendations

Wow, just wow.

If this was fraud, then how does one explain the droughts and tornadoes in the south, Hurricane Irene, the dust storms out west, the cold in California and the record snowstorms in the east?

Penn State better known as “Cover Up Central”! Birds of a feather Mr. Mann.

Youre[sic] covers have been pulled Mr. Mann and the molestation of your data models to “hide the decline” have been exposed. You and Phil Jones have defrauded the scientific community and your research needs to be retracted.

I believe you and Phil Jones are among the most reprehensible scientists the world has burped up in modern times.

Do yourself and the world a favor and get out of your profession! Perhaps a used car salesman may suit you better…

26 Recommendations

Molestation of data? Right AFTER mentioning the whole Penn State thing?

Good grief