Why would any “scientist” refuse to allow his data to be reviewed?
That’s not science. That’s fideism. Works for religion but not for science.
Penn State scientist Michael Mann grafted historical temperature data derived from tree rings and other sources to modern observations and smoothed things out to produce the now infamous “hockey stick” graph the UN likes so much.
Mann’s graph and the approach he used to create it has come in for withering criticism from other researchers.
Mann has consistently refused to share his data for others to examine, forcing one to wonder what it is he has to hide. (The Medieval Warm Period for one thing).
Mann tried to use the courts to silence critics.
CFACT’s Bonner Cohen reports at CFACT.org that a decision appears imminent in the legal battle taking place in Canada between Michael Mann and Tim Ball, a climate scientist from the University of Winnipeg.
The court ordered Mann to submit his temperature data for examination and he failed to comply.
Bonner quotes Dr. Ball who said, “We believe that he [Mann] withheld on the basis of a US court ruling that it was all his intellectual property. This ruling was made despite the fact the US taxpayer paid for the research and the research results were used as the basis of literally earth-shattering policies on energy and environment. The problem for him is that the Canadian court holds that you cannot withhold documents that are central to your charge of defamation regardless of the US ruling.”
Science should be conducted openly, in the light of day.
Michael Mann should lay his cards on the table for all to see. Unless of course, he was bluffing all along.