Reply With Quote
I didn't read the article but it must be one smart bear.
Probably much smarter than a Black Bear.
This was widely used by what I call the "denier" movement as a cause celebre, in that this guy was essentially accused of making up about seeing drowned polar bears.
Turns out that after all, he was merely the victim of a political witchhunt, in which global warming skeptics in Alaskan government actively persecuted him for the scientific paper he had the temerity to publish that pointed to warming at the pole and declining ice cover as the likely cause of the phenomena he and several others witnessed.
Federal agency lifts Alaska scientist's suspension
That is a short bit, but here are some more background articles:..ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — An Alaska scientist suspended for six weeks has been restored to his job at the agency that oversees offshore petroleum drilling.
A spokeswoman for the Bureau of Ocean Energy, Management, Regulation and Enforcement says Dr. Charles Monnett (moh-NAY') was returning to work Friday.
Melissa Schwartz says by email that Monnett was told he would have no role in developing or managing contracts, and would work in the agency's environmental assessment division.
The Interior Department's Office of Inspector General last week said by letter that Monnett had assisted a researcher in preparing a proposal while being the government official responsible for the reviewing of the proposal.
Advocacy group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility has claimed Monnett was targeted for his paper on drowned polar bears that spurred publicity on climate warming.
http://www.livescience.com/15313-pol...suspended.html
Here, of course, is the denier spin on the entire event:
http://nation.foxnews.com/global-war...lar-bear-fraud
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...2f2f0225000d4aArctic scientist's complaint being reviewed
By BECKY BOHRER, Associated Press – Aug 12, 2011
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — An inquiry is under way into the treatment of suspended Arctic scientist Charles Monnett, an Interior Department official said.
The department's scientific integrity officer, Ralph Morgenweck, confirmed the inquiry in a letter this week to the watchdog group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. PEER, which filed a complaint last month on Monnett's behalf, provided a copy to The Associated Press on Friday.
The group accuses top officials within Interior's Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, or BOEMRE, of scientific and scholarly misconduct for their treatment of Monnett.
PEER said Monnett, who coordinated much of BOEMRE's research on the Arctic ecology and wildlife, was placed on leave pending results of an inspector general's investigation into "integrity issues."
PEER, in its complaint, asked that Monnett be reinstated and that the investigation be dropped or pursued by specifying charges against Monnett, in accordance with department policy.
An Interior spokesman said Friday that the letter shows that PEER's allegation is being reviewed under the "standard procedures" contained within a scientific integrity policy implemented earlier this year.
PEER lists as subjects of its complaint agency director Michael Bromwich, acting Alaska regional director James Kendall, deputy regional director Jeffery Loman and any others involved in the handling of Monnett's case. It also names a special agent within the inspector general's office, who has questioned Monnett and his chain-of-command.
PEER has said the investigation into Monnett has focused on the scientific merit of a 2006 article in which he and a colleague recorded their observations of apparently drowned polar bears in the Arctic. That article helped to galvanize the global warming movement.
Monnett's suspension came in the midst of a monthslong investigation by the inspector general's office. BOEMRE has indicated that his being placed on leave was related to how a polar bear research project was awarded and managed.
I didn't read the article but it must be one smart bear.
Probably much smarter than a Black Bear.
Luckily, for Mr. polar bear, the Earth's climate is remarkably insensitive to enormous increases in CO2. No denying necessary.
LOL...
Random Propaganda, do you realize what you did?
You just called the "Associated Press" and "Investors" doing the "Denier spin!"
Fox Nation just quoted the first parts of two articles from those sites, and linked them.
Are you attaching that "Denier Spin" to fox for quoting the AP?
Unluckily for your the research you yourself have posted in the past does not agree. You should keep repeating it though. Maybe if you say it enough it'll become true. That would be pretty awesome, actually.
And it will become even less sensitive as more CO2 is added. It's not linear, it's logarithmic. If I am a denier, I'm only denying that there's any impending catastrophe. This is also where the so-called consensus falls apart. Anyway, good luck with the apocalypse.
You're definitely a denier. You don't actually read the you come and post here and you've got a of a track record proving that. You have a predetermined idea of what you think is happening and how you think it works and you immediately gravitate to any line of research that will back that up.
Its pretty sad to see someone who's actually smart enough to attain a degree in engineering do that. Its a waste. You can believe whatever you want and no one is out to change your mind but its pretty sad when its so blatantly obvious how bad your conformation bias is. When you finally have no where to turn because even you can't ignore the obvious you try to move the goalposts to show that its "only" warmed 1 degree over the past 100 year without even realizing that such an admission has damning consequences for future heat. On one hand you claim that forcing isn't strong then you claim that it is but its getting weaker. On one hand you talk about exponential growth and on the other you try to act as though CO2 concentration is growing as a linear function.
If you want to weasel around this much to avoid factual information then go right ahead. But honestly - no trolling or bs aside - I frankly think its sad as .
Manny is a denier of Solar Forcing.
Wild Cobra is a denier of Black surgeons
I see you belong in the loony bin.
Manny has reached his "tipping point".
The nice thing about raw data is, it doesn't give a about what side you're on. So, while Al Gore's disciples may paint a frightening picture, the data do not.
Lol polar bears.
because of something you said?
I don't think so.
This could be a hot topic.
Wild Idiot, do you realize what you did?
You just completely ignored the le of the Fox "news" article.
I realize it was in bold letters at the top, so it might have been easy to miss for someone with a bad case of confirmation bias who filters out things they find inconvenient to their point of view.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
