Since I have a lot of writing to do for work over the next two or three weeks, I will probably not be writing all that much for here. Its a hazard of being a graduate student. However, I do plan to occasionally link to articles that I find interesting with brief comments like I have in the past. So I wont be totally inactive, it is just unlikely that I will write my own essays or articles for a few weeks…
Today I have two articles related by global warming:
Just an example of why the raw data of any set of experiments if extremely important. This has to do with which NOAA thermometers were used for the US temperature trends. Compliant = ‘good’ data non-compliant should = ‘bad’ data, and yet for some reason, the report adjusted the good data to be more in line with the bad data.
The same man, Graham Spanier, led coverup style ‘investigations’ for both.
Spanier’s “investigation” of Jerry Sandusky was so thoroughly inept that it got him fired. When it was completed, Spanier stated that he had “complete confidence in how they have handled the allegations against Sandusky,” and he was fired very shortly thereafter. The recent Freeh report indicates that the investigation was conducted for the purpose of finding nothing. In other words, it was a cover-up.
It wasn’t the only time Spanier rigged an inept investigation for the purpose of finding nothing. In 2010, his investigators found that Penn State climatologist Michael Mann had done nothing wrong when he invented his “hockey stick trick,” to “hide the decline” and lend false credibility to climate change theory. The difference between the Mann investigation and the Sandusky investigation is that one covered up a sex offender and the other covered up a fraud.