Academic Freedom. Don’t you love it? I do. But I have noticed in my work that these days, AF tends to be a one way street–protecting those with “approved” views, but leaving heterodox thinkers twisting in the wind of denied tenure, teaching “punishment” undergrad classes, losing of lab space, refused permission to publish in journals or present at symposia, etc. You get the picture.
UVA has apparently shown another form of discriminatory conduct toward its former professors with differing views. One is a skeptic, named Pat Michaels. The other, Michael Mann, a famous alarmist. FOIA requests were issued for emails from both. They were gladly given up for one. But for the other, they were held tightly to the vest, with $500,000 in public money spent in legal fees to keep the professor’s communications private.
I’ll bet you can guess which is which. If not, from the story:
Chris Horner, working with the American Tradition Institute, had filed a freedom of information request with the University of Virginia for emails and materials former UVA Prof. Michael Mann generated during his time at the school. What we learned from our interview with Horner is jaw-dropping. When what Horner termed “a gaggle of pressure groups” got wind of people lurking around Mann’s emails, they descended on UVA stating, in effect “don’t you dare co-operate with law enforcement to release the records the taxpayer paid for in a fraud pre-investigation under a statute that passed unanimously [in the Virginia General Assembly],” that nowhere provides an exemption for academics.
Horner says that once these groups made their displeasure known, UVA “reversed course” and decided to fight, spending “$500,000 with [former U.S. Senator] John Warner’s law firm in Washington, D.C. to keep the taxpayer from seeing the records.” He recounts how he discovered UVA had a FOIA compliance officer – the same office that was eager to turn over the emails of former university climate scientist Pat Michaels to Greenpeace (once the group paid the appropriate fee) – and decided to file his own FOIA request for Mann’s emails.
But we know all this. UVA and the interest groups have been in Mann’s corner, fighting Ken Cuccinelli’s request for documents for months. But it was that Greenpeace request of UVA for Pat Michaels’ work product that has legs. The environmental group filed similar requests with other institutions seeking the records of climate skeptics, and in a couple of cases, mounted campaigns to have those skeptics fired from their positions. Where were the voices of academic freedom of expression during those campaigns? Sitting on their hands. Now, though, they have sprung into action because Michael Mann, who shares their climate change beliefs, is under what they deem to be attack.
I don’t care which side either of these professors is on: No viewpoint discrimination! The law should be followed equally and consistently in each case, with both professors treated in the same manner. But we know the game that is being played.
Hello, believers in global warming! Here’s another example of actions that hurt the credibility of your cause.
April 27th, 2011 | 7:50 pm
In the United States at least, former climate change believers are now demanding that politicians and law makers have the leading scientists and especially the unconscionable leading news editors, subjected to criminal charges for knowingly sustaining the criminal exaggerations of the CO2 mistake for the last 25 years. It is now appearing that issuing CO2 death threats to billions of children unnecessarily has not gone unnoticed and unlike Bush getting away with his false war in Iraq, the false war of climate change will sooner or later be dealt with in the courts. Treason charges for leading a country to a false war is one option now being looked at as politicians always need an enemy to blame.
And keep in mind that it was the scientists themselves that made environmental protection necessary in the first place when they supposedly polluted the planet with their evil chemicals and cancer causing pesticides and so how ironic is it that we bowed like fools to our Gods of science for 25 years of “unstoppable warming”?
Scientists are not gods and don’t forget that scientists also produced cruise missiles, cancer causing chemicals, land mine technology, nuclear weapons, germ warfare, cluster bombs, strip mining technology, Y2K, Y2Kyoto, deep sea drilling technology and now climate control. Proof of consensus not being real is the fact that scientists did not march in the streets when IPCC funding was pulled, the EPA was castrated and Obama’s not even mentioning the “crisis” in his state of the union speech. Consensus was a myth because if it were true, the consensus scientists declaring a climate emergency would act like it was an emergency and demand their CO2 mitigation be taken seriously. We believed a handful of lab coat consultants who said we could CONTROL the planet’s temperature and prevent it from boiling. Pure insanity as history will call this modern day witch burning. The new denier is anyone still believing voters will vote YES to taxing the air to make the weather colder. Not going to happen.
REAL planet lovers are happy and relieved a crisis was averted and real planet lovers don’t hold scientists as Gods and bow to politicians promising to make colder and lower the seas and scare kids with such doomsday glee.
Stay tuned. Call the courthouse.
April 27th, 2011 | 8:13 pm
The following is claimed:
“They were gladly given up for one”
Yet, there is no evidence or data supporting this claim.
It is my understanding, as this case broke last summer, that UVA was also stonewalling with the Greenpeace request – I recall reading such in a (U)VA newspaper last year. This would be in conflict with the unsupported claim; the burden of proof is on Smith, here.
Secondly, I’m not so sure the requests made by this Greenpeace organization are similar to those made by Cuccinelli. It is my understanding this Greenpeace organization wants to know who was funding the research, while Cuccinelli wants (unpublished) research data, private information, and correspondence.
Should this be the case, it would not be logical to demand the same blind treatment for each case. Apples and oranges.
Of course, the state of Virginia is free to waste as much of the taxpayer’s dollars as they please. I’ve been to Norfolk; I imagine the money could be put to better use.
May 18th, 2011 | 8:37 am
[...] “Global Warming Hysteria: What is Good for the Skeptic Should be Good for the Believer,” 4/27/2011, First Things [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact