Virginia Attorney General and University alumnus Ken Cuccinelli announced Oct. 4 that he was re-issuing a new civil investigative demand against the University after his first subpoena was denied in August. As stated in his press release, "the new CID has been drafted to comply with the judge's ruling," and it "contains information the judge believed was necessary."
To bring everybody up to speed: Cuccinelli filed a civil suit in August against a former University professor Michael Mann, invoking an anti-fraud law that prohibits individuals from making misleading or fraudulent claims to receive money from the state - in this case, grants for academic research. The suit was opened largely in response to the "Climategate" scandal of 2009, in which e-mails were leaked that suggested certain scientists, including Mann, willfully suppressed data that contradicted their own findings on global warming. Cuccinelli accuses Mann of knowingly publishing misleading findings (specifically the "hockey stick" graph that indicates a sharp increase in global temperatures in recent years) in order to receive grant money from the state of Virginia.
An Albermarle County judge ruled in August that of the five grants Cuccinelli called into question, only one was within his purview to investigate, and said the attorney general did not provide sufficient evidence to warrant a release of documents by the University to aid his investigation.
The Climategate scandal was an overblown controversy to be sure, but it brought to light unsettling attitudes within the climatology community. The individual realities that data was withheld, dissenting findings were suppressed and figures were incorrectly manipulated all coalesced to create a controversy much larger than the sum of its parts. The professional conduct of several climate researchers brought the validity of their findings into question, and once that occurs skeptics often dismiss an entire field of theory and findings, however unfairly. Individual investigations by the British Parliament and the Independent Science Assessment Panel have absolved all parties involved in Climategate from allegations of wrongdoing and note that the scientists' climate data are still sound. Despite those reinforcements, there is still some doubt that the entire truth has emerged.
Thus, we return to the attorney general's request for documents from the University regarding Mann. Frankly, Cuccinelli cannot be disdained for pursuing further investigation of the Climategate scandal; the issue rose to national prominence specifically because it would empower skeptics to question the validity of climate change research. Cuccinelli, like any American citizen, is well within his rights to demand accountability within the scientific community. As an elected official, he is in a position to challenge possible ethics violations like these.
The particular course of action Cuccinelli has chosen, however, must be abandoned. To enforce this new CID, the attorney general will have to prove that Mann published a study in 1998 while working at the University of Massachusetts to commit fraud against the state of Virginia for a research grant he was given in 2001. Not only was the grant awarded to conduct unrelated research about the ecosystem of the African Savannah, but it also was given before the law was passed.
Even if we were to disregard the substantial legal obstacles, the course of action Cuccinelli has chosen represents a potentially dangerous encroachment on the freedom of academic research. The attorney general contests that this is a fraud investigation not intended to infringe upon the rights of researchers. Cuccinelli's personal disagreement with Mann's contested findings, however, cannot be divorced from his subsequent lawsuit; his skepticism of climate change informs his decision to litigate. Regardless of whether it was the intention of his CID, Cuccinelli's action suggests that disagreeable scientific findings are subject to government oversight and regulation.
The issue is no longer about the contestable nature of Mann's findings, but rather the freedom of scientists to conduct research without fear of repercussion. The shift in focus is evident in University Spokesperson Carol Wood's assertion that University officials "will continue to stand for the principles the University has articulated ... and to support academic communities here and elsewhere." The University has incurred $352,874.76 in legal fees - not in an attempt to conceal academic wrongdoing or to stand in political solidarity behind Mann's findings. In denying Cuccinelli's demand for documents, the University upholds one of its most foundational commitments as voiced by Thomas Jefferson: "to follow truth wherever it may lead."
Travis Ortiz is a Viewpoint writer for The Cavalier Daily.
Read More
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | YesterdayUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
KURTZWEIL: Dockworkers’ unions cannot avoid the threat of automation
By Paul Kurtzweil | 3 days agoInstead of continuing to demand decreased automation, the union should work with the legislature in the hopes of driving investment into the reorganization of the current workforce.
