As Ace writes on “ClimateGate and the Big Lie,” he’s a cynical guy. “I think I’m even more cynical than most of you, and that’s saying something:”

So when I read that a Penn State investigation had “cleared” Michael Mann of wrongdoing, I assumed, of course, it was a whitewash, but I also assumed that they at least, you know, claimed things like “while the evidence is provocative, there is not enough to prove a case against Professor Mann…” That is, I thought they’d at least dress it up in that sort of judicial language, and rest their claims on the case not being established beyond a reasonable doubt, and so on.

Well, that’s what I assumed.

Advertisement

Have you read this?

This, my dear friends, is amazing.

Recall that one of the biggest knocks on climate “science” is that it never makes a prediction that can be verified (actually, it does, but they’re always wrong), but that “proof” of its veracity comes from the fact that everyone’s models agree with everyone else’s.

So, in other words, we know the theory is true because people who believe in the theory agree with other people who believe in the theory that the theory is true.

Look, the models they make, based on the same assumptions they agree on, all say about the same thing! Q.E.D. That’s Latin for “How my ass taste, bitch?”

Right? So that’s a big problem right there. There is no proof of this except that the people pushing it all agree with each other.

Now, if you can believe it (and I still can’t; this is stunning) this is precisely the reason they claim that Michael Mann cannot possibly be guilty of scientific malfeasance.

Honestly, if you haven’t read this, get ready to catch your falling jaw.

Gird your loins, grab your jaw, and click on over to read.

Related: For the left, “Al Gore still matters,” the Politico claims. For the rest of us, Gallup notes that “Americans’ current views of former Vice President Al Gore have become significantly more negative compared with three years ago, and are among the worst for him in more than a decade.”