• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Latest Leaked Climate Documents Scandal

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #51
    Originally posted by pjclarke View Post
    FTFY.

    The polar bear expert Charles Monnett returned to work without any charges being made. The 'investigation' was a farce - he was never informed of any charges - and is itself the subject of a complaint.

    PEER:

    Not doing so well with the evidence to back up the smear are we?
    So have the charges been dropped then?

    ww.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/charles-monnett-polar-bear-researcher-under-scrutiny-returns-to-work/2011/08/26/gIQAMCdsgJ_story.html

    Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement spokeswoman Melissa Schwartz wrote in an e-mail that Monnett “was informed that he will have no role in developing or managing contracts of any kind, and will instead be in our environmental assessment division.” She added, “The return of an employee to work does not suggest that future administrative actions cannot/will not be taken.”
    Doesn't look like it.

    If he's innocent, why has been stripped of his responsibilities for developing and managing contracts?

    Lets wait and see shall we.
    I'm alright Jack

    Comment


      #52
      Originally posted by BlasterBates View Post
      I'll just interpret that for EO's benefit:

      "no"



      It sure makes you wonder, if people are prepared to support faked documents and support them so strongly because it's all in a just cause
      what other falsehoods are they liable to spout ?

      the end justifes the means eh pj? reminds me of
      'we had to destroy the village in order to save it' or
      Gott mitt uns
      (\__/)
      (>'.'<)
      ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

      Comment


        #53
        It sure makes you wonder, if people are prepared to support faked documents and support them so strongly because it's all in a just cause what other falsehoods are they liable to spout ?

        the end justifes the means eh pj?
        No smoke wthout fire eh EO? I have not. I do not. The ends do not justify the dishonest means. Let me repeat quite clearly that I regard Gleick's actions to obtain the genuine documents as criminal and idiotic.

        But I also endorse this

        Kert Davies, the research director of Greenpeace USA, said it would be unfortunate if the row over Gleick and his methods to obtain the documents distracted from Heartland's work to block climate action.

        "There are a lot of people involved with Heartland's multimillion dollar climate denial machine who want to change the subject to anything else."
        My subconscious is annoying. It's got a mind of its own.

        Comment


          #54
          So have the charges been dropped then?
          There were no charges to drop. Please stop making stuff up.
          Last edited by pjclarke; 21 February 2012, 12:58.
          My subconscious is annoying. It's got a mind of its own.

          Comment


            #55
            Originally posted by pjclarke View Post
            There were no charges to drop. Please stop making stuff up.
            Perhaps I should have said investigation. I do apologise.

            Is he still under suspicion of fraud, given the fact that his employer doesn't rule out taking further administrative action?

            But you are right it is wrong to make stuff up such as distributing fake documents.
            Last edited by BlasterBates; 21 February 2012, 13:15.
            I'm alright Jack

            Comment


              #56
              It was a politically-motivated (and hilariously clumsy - read the interview transcript in the link below) witch-hunt against Monnett from Day 1. Having failed to find evidence of scientific malpractice, the IG went trawling for adminstrative malpractice. They tried to make a stink about some contractural irregularities - but their timelines turned out to be all wrong.

              PEER:
              Last edited by pjclarke; 21 February 2012, 13:30.
              My subconscious is annoying. It's got a mind of its own.

              Comment


                #57
                There is a well known problem in the way the human brain works. Once a hard-won lesson is etched into the head, things that support it are skimmed uncritically and things that oppose it it are held up to the most critical examination, contempt and ridicule.

                It's a very useful trait, in evolutionary terms. If you know that there will be berries on that tree, or water in that stream, you dont want a big argument everytime you have to feed your people.

                Of course in the modern world, sometimes its even more valuable to suspend disbelief and to examine things critically, even your most cherished beliefs.

                Some people are totally unable to do this, there is no help for them. They suffer from Confirmation bias.

                So pj, I might trust you with a spear and a bowl for your berries, but I would never let you near a microscope or a debate.
                (\__/)
                (>'.'<)
                ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

                Comment


                  #58
                  Originally posted by EternalOptimist View Post
                  There is a well known problem in the way the human brain works. Once a hard-won lesson is etched into the head, things that support it are skimmed uncritically and things that oppose it it are held up to the most critical examination, contempt and ridicule.

                  It's a very useful trait, in evolutionary terms. If you know that there will be berries on that tree, or water in that stream, you dont want a big argument everytime you have to feed your people.

                  Of course in the modern world, sometimes its even more valuable to suspend disbelief and to examine things critically, even your most cherished beliefs.

                  Some people are totally unable to do this, there is no help for them. They suffer from Confirmation bias.

                  So pj, I might trust you with a spear and a bowl for your berries, but I would never let you near a microscope or a debate.
                  "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing " is a phrase that could have been invented with you in mind.
                  HTH BIKIW
                  Hard Brexit now!
                  #prayfornodeal

                  Comment


                    #59
                    but I would never let you near a microscope or a debate.
                    Says the guy who posted the embarrassing and long-debunked falsehood about DDT being banned and costing milions of lives .......
                    My subconscious is annoying. It's got a mind of its own.

                    Comment


                      #60
                      Another symptom is the constant need to revise previous strong assertions. The temptation for those suffering confirmation bias to rush in with the scoop without checking the facts, or apply 'the sense check' is so overpowering that it's irresistible.

                      If I had a pound for every thread that you have modified I would be as rich as Al Gore.
                      (\__/)
                      (>'.'<)
                      ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X