More Heat on Mann at Home

by Paul Chesser, Heartland Institute Correspondent on December 3, 2009

in Blog

Pennsylvania State University’s Climategate guy, hockey stick creator Michael Mann, has already come under scrutiny from the school over suspicions that he manipulated data to fit his global warming alarmism faith. For good measure state Senator Jeffrey Piccola, chairman of the Education Committee, wants to make sure PSU president Graham Spanier follows through, as he explained in a letter he sent today:

The allegations of intellectual and scientific fraud like those made against Dr. Mann are serious against anybody involved in academics, but the impact in this case is significantly elevated. The work of Dr. Mann and other scientists at the CRU is being used to develop economic and environmental policies in states and countries across the world. Considering the saliency of the work being conducted by the CRU, anything short of the pursuit of absolute science cannot be accepted or tolerated.

Piccola’s take-home message for Spanier is if his investigation is a whitewash, then the PA Senate Education Committee will conduct its own look-see-find.

Hat tip: Commonwealth Foundation, which on Monday made their own request for an investigation of Mann.

Gary Novak December 5, 2009 at 3:23 am

"The pursuit of absolute science" is a joke. The foundation of the claimed established science is this fudge factor: Heat Increase = 5.35 ln C/Cx

This is a logarithmic curve for the claimed amount of heat produced by increase in CO2. Guess what, an increase in CO2 from 10 to 20 ppm is the same spot on the curve as an increase from 100 to 200 ppm. It's 3.7 watts per square meter of heat increase in both cases.

This is because the fudge factor is so rudimentary that it cannot account for absolute values. It is designed for ratios only.

This bit of fakery was supposedly derived from Beer's-Lambert laws and Planck's equations, which means they are acts of God. But those equations don't work for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, because they cease to apply upon saturation. CO2 saturates at the center of its main absorption peak in about ten meters. So a substitute curve was contrived as a fudge factor.

I have more details on this on my web site on a page titled Fake Equations, which is here:

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: