Report AGW federal funding fraud! Win valuable prizes!

[Wakeupcall]

…I am so glad to report that Michael Mann – creator of the incredible Hockey Stick curve and one of the scientists most heavily implicated in the Climategate scandal – is about to get a very nasty shock. When he turns up to work on Monday, he’ll find that all 27 of his colleagues at the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University have received a rather tempting email inviting them to blow the whistle on anyone they know who may have been fraudulently misusing federal grant funds for climate research.

I found this pretty strange (kinda funny, no?). Interesting process for both sides of AGW to discuss.

Moe Lane Report AGW federal funding fraud! Win valuable prizes!

Report AGW federal funding fraud! Win valuable prizes! - Moe_Lane’s blog - RedState

[Akrasia]

I really don't get it. Is this an e-mail Moe Lane (whoever he is) sent to the scientists advising them of whistleblower legislation? Is it an e-mail sent by the U.S. authorities who are launching an investigation?
Is it an e-mail sent by a nigerian prince who needs to transfer his wealth out of the country and needs their account details?

There was zero information in that link, certainly not enough to merit it's own slanderous thread that implies that there has been accounting fraud at the earth system science centre?

I suspect that this was just a piece of awful propaganda, a fishing exercise from a right wing blogger who sent some e-mails and then posted an article about them which has been crossposted. probably on 10,000 web forums by now to try and dirty the names of these scientists by linking their names with fraud and embezzelment.

[The Caped Cod]

Under US law, regardless of whether or not a prosecution results, the whistleblower stands to make very large sums of money: it is based on a percentage of the total government funds which have been misused, in this case perhaps as much as $50 million.

Climategate: Michael Mann's very unhappy New Year – Telegraph Blogs

I think that might be the relevent info to understand the OP.
Delingpole is stil an arrogent littl tït though

[Akrasia]

I think that might be the relevent info to understand the OP.
Delingpole is stil an arrogent littl tït though

Thanks. I found that myself a few minutes ago (not very well linked to on the op)

Basically, it's an e-mail dreamt up by 'climategate.com' where firm of lawyers along with a former CIA agent Kent Clizbe are trying to bribe collegues of Michael Mann into turning out evidence of fraud.

It is not an indication that there is a criminal investigation in to fraud at the Earth Science centre or even that there is any evidence to suggest that any fraud has taken place.

What it does do is highlight what the victims of 'climategate' are up against. An organised campaign to disrupt their scientific work. It's vicious political propaganda from the U.S. conservative right who are opposed to global warming theory on purely ideological grounds

[The Caped Cod]

Thanks. I found that myself a few minutes ago (not very well linked to on the op)

Basically, it's an e-mail dreamt up by 'climategate.com' where firm of lawyers along with a former CIA agent Kent Clizbe are trying to bribe collegues of Michael Mann into turning out evidence of fraud.

It is not an indication that there is a criminal investigation in to fraud at the Earth Science centre or even that there is any evidence to suggest that any fraud has taken place.

What it does do is highlight what the victims of 'climategate' are up against. An organised campaign to disrupt their scientific work. It's vicious political propaganda from the U.S. conservative right who are opposed to global warming theory on purely ideological grounds

The email (unnofficial as you say) is informing his co-workers of the potential financial benefits of blowing the whistle on the misuse or fraudulant use of Federal Funding in the research. If the funds were used to finance data that is not true, then the whistle-blower will receive a percentage of the misused funds even if the misuse is not proven to be criminal. Had "Climategate" happened in a US facility funded by Federal grants and someone blew the whistle they would have been entitled to a hefty reward.
Whille I hate the misuse (or theft) of taxpayer money in principle, I'm not sure I like the methodology of inciting denonnciation. If someone has reason to blow the whistle, then I'm not sure if a financial incentive in necessary.

[Akrasia]

The email (unnofficial as you say) is informing his co-workers of the potential financial benefits of blowing the whistle on the misuse or fraudulant use of Federal Funding in the research. If the funds were used to finance data that is not true, then the whistle-blower will receive a percentage of the misused funds even if the misuse is not proven to be criminal. Had "Climategate" happened in a US facility funded by Federal grants and someone blew the whistle they would have been entitled to a hefty reward.
Whille I hate the misuse (or theft) of taxpayer money in principle, I'm not sure I like the methodology of inciting denonnciation. If someone has reason to blow the whistle, then I'm not sure if a financial incentive in necessary.

It is a bit of a leap to state the hacked e-mails constitute any proof of fraud, but there is an investigation underway which we ought to wait for before concluding that there was deliberate fraud at CRU or that data was falsified.

Most of the most common talking points in those e-mails have been spun and misrepresented in a crude and extremely dishonest manner by the talk radio hosts and the bloggers, of the rest of the e-mails what is most apparent is not what is in the e-mails, but what is absent. There is a lot of giving out about the tactics of individuals like Mcyntire and Watts, and there is talk of trying to keep certain research documents out of the journals (on the basis that the science was of appalling standard rather than an attempt to prevent good scientific evidence out of the journals because it contradicts their own findings)
But the e-mails don't show any concerted effort to prevent any reputable scientists from publishing any contrary research as long as it is of an appropriate standard.
See the youtube link in my signiture for a more better explanation of why the 'Climategage' emails do not damage the science of global warming or indicate any real fraud

[The Caped Cod]

It is a bit of a leap to state the hacked e-mails constitute any proof of fraud, but there is an investigation underway which we ought to wait for before concluding that there was deliberate fraud at CRU or that data was falsified.

Most of the most common talking points in those e-mails have been spun and misrepresented in a crude and extremely dishonest manner by the talk radio hosts and the bloggers, of the rest of the e-mails what is most apparent is not what is in the e-mails, but what is absent. There is a lot of giving out about the tactics of individuals like Mcyntire and Watts, and there is talk of trying to keep certain research documents out of the journals (on the basis that the science was of appalling standard rather than an attempt to prevent good scientific evidence out of the journals because it contradicts their own findings)
But the e-mails don't show any concerted effort to prevent any reputable scientists from publishing any contrary research as long as it is of an appropriate standard.
See the youtube link in my signiture for a more better explanation of why the 'Climategage' emails do not damage the science of global warming or indicate any real fraud

The reward doesn't depend on a criminal prosecution. If the data were shown to be even massaged or fudged in any way for any agenda, personal or political, then the funding has been misused and they whistle-blower has a cut of the funding given. In theory anyway.

[Theowolfe]

Akrasia, you do yourself no favours by trying to excuse the activities of the CRU and Michael Mann by implication.

They have been caught climbing out of the window with a bag marked swag and the alarmists, along with the help of AP and other media outlets continue to excuse their behaviour.

But I suppose we can't expect much better from the AGW movement, their currency is hyperbole, exaggeration and lies.

[Akrasia]

The reward doesn't depend on a criminal prosecution. If the data were shown to be even massaged or fudged in any way for any agenda, personal or political, then the funding has been misused and they whistle-blower has a cut of the funding given. In theory anyway.

It sounds like a really dodgy law. I wonder who would get to decide whether the data has been 'massaged or fudged'. I doubt any judges would be qualified to interpret raw climate data, and by its nature, climate data has to be adjusted in order for it to be useful.

[Akrasia]

Akrasia, you do yourself no favours by trying to excuse the activities of the CRU and Michael Mann by implication.

They have been caught climbing out of the window with a bag marked swag and the alarmists, along with the help of AP and other media outlets continue to excuse their behaviour.

No they haven't.

But I suppose we can't expect much better from the AGW movement, their currency is hyperbole, exaggeration and lies.

This is kind of ironic given the claims about 'climategate' that can be found throughout the right wing conservative blogsphere that match exactly that description (eg: Jones Admitted he used a trick to hide the decline in global warming", a claim that is demonstrably false in that that all it does is deliberately misinterpret two words and take them totally out of context, and then substitute false meaning to the words. It's one of the most dishonest pieces of propaganda you could imagine producing.

Examples of where this lie was used by
Sarah Palin
Pro & Con: Does 'Climate-gate' cast doubt on global warming claims? - Minnesotans For Global Warming
Alex Jones
Hide The Decline – Climategate (reposting of alex jones newsletter)
Fox New Hemmer falsely claims CRU emails show scientists hiding "evidence of a decline in global temperatures" | Media Matters for America
Telegraph Climategate: University of East Anglia U-turn in climate change row - Telegraph

Random blogs

Climate Researchers' Leaked "hide the decline" in data about temperatures. - Page 2
“Hide the Decline”: Global Warmists Got Some ‘Splainin’ to Do :All That Is Necessary…
IPCC Database Hacked: “….to Hide the Decline” of Global Temperature Euro-med

Could go on and on but you get the picture