New Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) replies have exposed more misdeeds by Professor Edward Wegman and Yasmin Said at George Mason University (GMU), closely involved with the Kochs, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and many others known for attacks on climate science. This post reviews background and attaches FOIA files that unearthed evidence for:
-pervasive mis-use of Federal funds for inappropriate work,
-plagiarism or falsification in documents used to seek grants or credit,
-GMU violations of Federal...






















Comments
ad hominem attacks have no teeth, and the bark is a whisper
"He has a good name for the cause, eh? Stallman?"
welcome new "member"
dear john
Kevin posts an ad hom attack, and my pointing it out elicits your canned nonsensical reply above. If you two are representative, it's not surprising the public isn't buying it.
Let "the public" speak for themselves
Sure. As long as Kevin and John approve?
Since Kevin led off with ridicule and the ad hominem attack, it's perfectly fair to comment.
And you, John, may be under the impression that what passes for your writing style is more than bluster, but that's only your own opinion, and it's highly overrated.
The public is indeed speaking, and the message that you need to deal with is that they aren't buying what you're trying to sell. Rather than come unglued, why don't you ask yourself why? If the science is indeed settled, then perhaps the fault is with the salesmen, and their techniques.
Like ad hom attacks on a persons name.
Like pulling out the same canned bluster when you get called on it.
I have asked myself "why".
You're Not Answering Yourself Truthfully
You're falling far short of your goal.
As far as your bluster being "unique", visiting the local middle school lunchroom would cure you of that mistaken belief very quickly.
If you truly believe in your cause, you should face the reality that you and Kevin, with your schoolyard taunts, cheap trash talk, and fact-deficient polemic, are not productive. Why don't you quit and let someone with more knowledge and a better vocabulary step up? Based on your performance here, there should be lots of candidates.
Why does the SEPWC call testimony from idiots?
Why does the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee accept testimony about science from non-scientists?
Or is it that in order to get the correct answer: i.e. the answer that matches Inhofes conclusions that are already decided upon, they only call witnesses to give the correct testimony?
Apostrophe not working
Good question really. Why
Good question really. Why not bring in some paid lobyists from the CEI or Cato? The public is just as clueless about who these people are most of the time, all they hear is Dr. in their names and think the person must be right....Perhaps the point really is just to score news clip highlights anyway so it doesnt much matter who you bring in to support your point of view?
nice pretty graph
Are we reaching a point where climate graphs have become totally and absolutely meaningless? If anyone wants to go on a 1 minute graph hunt on the internet, they can prove current warming and cooling, increasing and decreasing storm activity, flattening and rising sea levels, warming and cooling Oceans, hockey sticks and nothing special going on.
Graphs prove absolutely everything and absolutely nothing.
wind farm opponents
Can you believe it ! these people are trying to stop this wind farm!!
www.palmerston-north.info
Recent data shows that the
Recent data shows that the sky us definately getting darker.
No wait, it's getting lighter. No, I was right the first time, it is getting darker.
Now it's lighter, the long-term trend is obviously lighter, but mainly in the east. The scientists don't see this trend because they lack commonsense.
Wait, darker. This decade is obviously darker. I'll post an update in the morning.