Portland woman charged Al Gore on sexual harassment. What next?


Question of the week:

In 2009 a Portland massage therapist talked to police in detail about a sexual harassment encounter with former President Al Gore as reported in The Oregonian. Police did not continue the case because there was not enough evidence. The painful dilemma of any sexual harassment case is that it comes down to two conflicting testimonies among an incident occurring in private. Every American is innocent until proven guilty — including your political opponents. On the flip side, a serious crime may have occurred and can this woman receive the justice and healing she deserves or will victims always be left behind in light of the nature of the crime and the celebrity status of the criminal.

What can be done? What should be done? Where will this go?

POLICE REPORT HERE

Why The Portland Tribune passed on the story 2 years ago

Share
  • conservatively speaking

    Sep 2004, Mr. Gore receives a ticket from the OSP -https://wbli.com/morningshow/algorespeed2.html

    Oct 2006, Mr. ah, um, Stone…scarcely a warning from PPB, wink, wink!

  • valley p

    “What can be done? What should be done? Where will this go?”

    Well, based on the weird photo you included of Gore, we can certainly see where YOU would like it to go.

  • Rupert in Springfield

    Al Gores global warming hokum is more believable than this charge.

    Looking at the police report we have someone who reported unwanted sexual contact to the Portland Police, naming Al Gore as the perp.

    The accuser then cancels three appointments to be interviewed by the police regarding this matter.

    The Portland police are then notified there will be no pursuit of a criminal case, just a civil one.

    Frankly it would be difficult to construct an allegation that had less validity to it, and more indicators to set of the BS meter than this story.

    Has the press been wrong in the past to sit on stories that would embarrass liberals? Of course, and it occurs all too frequently.

    Does this mean the press is to be faulted for not reporting this?

    No. Absent something not being reported, this story is clearly nonsense.

    This story should be dropped. Past failures of the press to investigate liberals does not warrant undue weight given to clearly fraudulent stories such as this one.

    • jim karlock

      KATU has a link to a 73 page police report, the above link is to a 4 page version. The longer report contains page after page of explicit details.

      KATU story: https://www.katu.com/news/local/96980354.html

      The long police report: https://images.bimedia.net/documents/Gore_reports.pdf

      Thanks
      JK

    • conservatively speaking

      Gore was very much a public figure at the time of the ‘incident’ – and, with all the Bush-whacking going on…what’s in weird Potland, stays in Potland, especially if the central character’s character might diminish the former VP’s chances to gain DNC support for the 2008 ticket.

      The good news is Mr. Gore did not score enough points, the bad news is BHO superceded him and HRC. Even worse, Wesley Clark was probably the best DNC candidate at the time, considering the fine kettle of red herring stew the Obamanation has U.S. currently in, Rupee.

  • Anonymous

    I’ll believe something Algore says right after he moves into a 1,500 square foot energy efficient house on a 5,000 square foot lot.

  • Steve Plunk

    I agree with Rupert. High profile individuals are subject to false claims much more often than the average citizen. Money, power, and prestige all attract weirdos who can make stuff up and hope for a cash settlement. In this case it’s the failure to keep the interview appointments that leads one to conclude this was probably not worthy of note. It may have happened but without all the facts we must conclude he is innocent.

    Al gore may be a world class elitist and shameful purveyor of false science but he’s also presumed innocent until proven guilty.

  • Anonymous

    you can’t spell “massage therapist” without “rapist”

    • Rupert in Springfield

      Hey now that’s pretty clever!

  • valley p

    Yes, well you also can’t spell it without “ass.”

    • Anonymous

      Yeah, I was going to include that as well, but then I thought it might get censored.

      • Rupert in Springfield

        And, thinking about Gores size, you also can’t spell it without “mass”!

      • “”

        How about censoring the vicarious ads routinely appearing in the posts? Too, the foreign language crapola posts! Press one for English, repress the nonsense.

  • David Appell

    Anonymous 9:54 wrote:
    > I’ll believe something Algore says right after he moves into a 1,500 square
    >foot energy efficient house on a 5,000 square foot lot.

    Why? The solution to the climate problem does not require that we all live like monks. It would never work anyway — we all want, and deserve, all the benefits of modern life. The answer is to replace energy derived from fossil fuels with energy derived from renewable sources…..

    • Anonymous

      Dream on renewable wacko. Decimating our food supply with that farce ethanol (takes over 1.5 gallons of gas and 7 gallons of water for every gallon of ethanol), the windmill farce (with windmills built in China by a Mexican company) and the solar panel joke that wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for subsidies. We would need to solar panel over the entire state of California (which is not a bad idea except that they would come here for their free healthcare) to come even close providing any semblance of power.

      Renewable energy is one of those massive hoaxes that guys like Algory makes millions off. All he was doing was trying to trade carbon credits for a little loving. Trying to “Spread” his “Carbon footprint”

    • jim karlock

      *David Appell:* Why? The solution to the climate problem does not require that we all live like monks.
      *JK:* A 90 % reduction in fossil fuel use with NO READY REPLACEMENT most certainly does require us to shiver in the dark. Something that the green idiots have dreamed about for years.

      *David Appell:* The answer is to replace energy derived from fossil fuels with energy derived from renewable sources…..
      *JK:* Care to name just one that is ready to supply 90% of our energy needs 24/7?

      There are none. Not wind. Not solar. Not wave. Not geothermal. They are all “almost ready” and have been for decades.

      The only non CO2 utility scale sources we have are nuclear and hydro. Both are off the table due to the ignorant green’s opposition.

      Thanks
      JK

      • David Appell

        > JK: A 90 % reduction in fossil fuel use with NO READY REPLACEMENT most certainly
        > does require us to shiver in the dark

        Which is why no serious person is advocating such a change, nor is there any chance whatsoever that such a change will take place. People aren’t idiots. Even NGOs are’t idiots. You’re merely constructing strawmen for your own ideological purposes.

        • jim karlock

          How about the goal of reducing CO2 to 1990 levels in just a few years. No exceptions if alternatives are not available?

          Thanks
          JK

        • jim karlock

          Just last night KOIN had a clip of Sam Adams saying that we should close Boardman by 2014.

          There is no apparent replacement for the power.

          What does David say about that?

          Thanks
          JK

          • David Appell

            > What does David say about that?

            I don’t live in Portland, I don’t watch KOIN, and really I couldn’t care less. Except to say that I’m 100% sure that no Oregonian is going to have to live in a tent because their utility bill goes from $40/mth to $45/mth.

          • jim karlock

            Laughable David, just laughable.

            Do you really believe that a $5/month increase will cause people to cut their electric use by 90%?

            Are you really that dumb?

            Thanks
            JK

          • jim karlock

            *BTW, David,*
            We are still waiting for you to tell us where we are going to get utility scale non-CO2 energy.

            Thanks
            JK

          • David Appell

            > We are still waiting for you to tell us where we are going to get utility scale non-CO2 energy

            You are already getting it — hydropower. More here than in almost any other place.

            While no one source will substitute for coal & oil, there is certainly the possibility that a combination of renewable sources (hydro, solar, wind, wave, tidal) + energy efficiency can do most of the job.

          • Anonymous

            Wind, Solar and Bio fuels are all a colossal waste of taxpay’s money!!!!!!! Money down the drain!!!!

          • jim karlock

            *David Appell:*
            While no one source will substitute for coal & oil, there is certainly the possibility that a combination of renewable sources (hydro, solar, wind, wave, tidal) + energy efficiency can do most of the job.
            *JK:*
            Sure am glad there is a “possibility” of a suitable energy source. Do you happen to know of any that actually work? (The carbon reductions are to start real soon.) Especially since wave and tidal are non-starters and solar and wind costly and intermittent, thus requiring full time backup. And hydro supplies less than 50% of our power and the progressive fools are advocating tearing out dams, not building more.

            BTW2: Did you ever study economics? I ask because you seem economically illiterate, like most progressives and liberals. See Are you smarter than a Fifth Grader online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703561604575282190930932412.html

            Thanks
            JK

  • jim karlock

    So where is the surprise here?

    Al Gore has been showing a complete disregard for other people’s well bing for years as he advocates crazy climate theories that will make him rich while hurting millions and he knowingly includes lies designed to fool people in his presentations. He has already gotten many people killed through higher food process with the nutty bio fuel craze and has no qualms about millions dying because of the coming increase in the cost of energy. He cares not about more millions having their lives shortened by being stuck in poverty. He is a thoroughly evil person, utterly without caring about others as long as he gets his way. He is advocating the killing of more people than Hitler or Stalin. Unfortunately most of his followers are too stupid to realize this (or simply don’t care either.)

    This county narrowly dodged a bullet in the Florida election.

    Al Gore lied, people died!

    Thanks
    JK

    • David Appell

      Al Gore is certainly not “evil” nor does he disregard people’s suffering. What a crock. Al Gore is trying to point out that science says that emitting GHGs into out atmosphere at today’s rate, and at future rates, is bound to lead to planetary problems.

      It’s a simple message. Demonizing the messanger is a very, very weak and sad counterargument.

      • jim karlock

        I am demonizing Al’s lies he includes to sell the message.

        Of course without the lies, the message doesn’t fly.

        Thanks
        JK

        • David Appell

          > Of course without the lies, the message doesn’t fly.

          That’s because you lack the training and education to read and understand the leading scientific journals. They contain essentially no information that contradicts the argument for an anthropogenic influence on climate, because that is what climate scientists have found, just like scientific journals have uncovered many other truths over the decades.

          Truth is truth, and science finds it. That’s why the computer on your desk works.

          • jim karlock

            Contain no information opposing the dangerous warming claims?

            You are simply lying – you know better.

            You will find links to 100s of peer -reviewed papers that contain observations that contradict you idiot claims about dangerous warming.

            Thanks
            JK

  • David Appell

    JK wrote:
    > Al Gore has been showing a complete disregard for other people’s well bing for years
    > as he advocates crazy climate theories that will make him rich while hurting millions

    Baloney. Gore has merely been communicating the best scientific knowledge of recent years. There is, in actuality, very little doubt that humans are now influencing our planet’s climate, or that it’s going to get much worse in future decades.

    Know-nothings like Jim Kadlock, who didn’t even graduate from college, are dedicated to convincing you otherwise, Don’t believe such professional prevaricators.

    • jim karlock

      *David Appell:* Baloney. Gore has merely been communicating the best scientific knowledge of recent years.
      *JK:* Oh really? Then why did the British court find 9 lies in his movie? The grand-daddy of all is his lies is that the ice cores show CO2 causes warming when they actually show the opposite. He knew it and choose to include it in his video. The foundation of his case rested on this scene & he made a decision to lie to people to further his cause.

      *David Appell:* There is, in actuality, very little doubt that humans are now influencing our planet’s climate, or that it’s going to get much worse in future decades.
      *JK:* How is that David? The best you have been able to come up with merely parrots the IPCC report which says we can’t figure out anything else, so it must be man. IPCC lead author and CRU head Jones summarized this fallacy nicely in his BBC interview. He believes man is the cause of global warming because: * “The fact that we can’t explain the warming from the 1950s by solar and volcanic forcing”*

      *David Appell:* Know-nothings like Jim Kadlock, who didn’t even graduate from college, are dedicated to convincing you otherwise, Don’t believe such professional prevaricators.
      *JK:* David always inclines an ad-homin when he loses an argument.

      Thanks
      JK

      • David Appell

        > JK: How is that David? The best you have been able to come up with merely parrots
        > the IPCC report which says we can’t figure out anything else, so it must be man

        Pure, absolute BS, as I have pointed out many times now. GCMs use known forcings, anthropogenic and natural, to explain recent climate. They CANNOT explain recent climate with only natural forces (sun, volcanoes). But they CAN explain recent climate when manmade forcings (GHGs + land use changes) are included.

        • jim karlock

          *David Appell:* GCMs use known forcings, anthropogenic and natural, to explain recent climate. They CANNOT explain recent climate with only natural forces (sun, volcanoes). But they CAN explain recent climate when manmade forcings (GHGs + land use changes) are included.
          *JK:* And as I have pointed out, and any entry level modeler knows, if you leave out a factor or get the weights wrong, you can still match history, but you have no predictive power.

          If your models are so good, why did they just happen to miss the current pause in warming? A15 year pause according to Jones. A few more years ans it will be climate!

          The simple fact is that the models are worthless, yet you keep trying top pawn them off on us as a standard of excellence.

          Thanks
          JK

          • David Appell

            > JK: And as I have pointed out, and any entry level modeler knows, if you leave
            > out a factor or get the weights wrong, you can still match history, but you have
            > no predictive power.

            No known factors are being “left out.”

            Nor are “weights” being used. Such weights — known scientifically as “flux corrections” — are a thing of the past, as you’d know if you had read the IPCC 4AR.

          • jim karlock

            *David Appel:* No known factors are being “left out.”
            *JK:* You are assuming that all factors are really known. This is just one of the fatal flaws in your logic.

            *David Appel:* Nor are “weights” being used. Such weights — known scientifically as “flux corrections” — are a thing of the past, as you’d know if you had read the IPCC 4AR.
            *JK:* Bull Shat. Each factor has to be assigned a weight, whatever it is called.

            Thanks
            JK

      • David Appell

        > JK: David always inclines an ad-homin when he loses an argument.

        No, Jim, it just points out that you are not very educated and you continually make the most elementary of scientific flaws. It’s not even your fault, really, but probably that of your parents.

        • jim karlock

          Now David is attacking my parents. A sure sign he knows that he utterly lost the logical argument.

          Thanks
          JK

          • David Appell

            > Now David is attacking my parents. A sure sign he knows that he utterly lost the logical argument.

            Well… yes. If your parents knew what would be good for you, they would have sent you to college.

            Apparently they did not.

          • valley p

            He didn’t attack them Jim. Here merely assigned some responsibility. That is what conservatives normally advocate no? Should he blame the government instead?

  • David Appell

    > JK: Oh really? Then why did the British court find 9 lies in his movie?

    Because a movie is not science, and Gore is not a scientist. Science is done in the scientific literature and in scientific seminars & colloquia, not in Hollywood documentaries. Do you understand the difference?

    • jim karlock

      *David Appell:* Because a movie is not science, and Gore is not a scientist.
      *JK:* No, he is two bit liar who intentionally included lies in his move to scare people into making him rich, He is slime.

      *David Appell:* Science is done in the scientific literature and in scientific seminars & colloquia, not in Hollywood documentaries. Do you understand the difference?
      *JK:* Yes, do you?
      Do you consider subverting the peer review process to be science
      Do you consider hiding flaws in key data (“hide the decline”) to be science?
      Do you consider hiding data from scrutiny to be science?
      Do you consider destruction of evicence to be science?

      All of the above things were done by our leading climate scientists – the ones that David believes in. See SustainableOregon.com

      Thanks
      JK

      • David Appell

        > David Appell: Because a movie is not science, and Gore is not a scientist.
        >> JK: No, he is two bit liar who intentionally included lies in his move to scare
        >> people into making him rich, He is slime.

        I honestly don’t care what Gore says — he does not speak for science. He is an activist, not less than than the AEI or CEI or dozens of conservative institutions (such as those who fund Climatedepot.com).

        I take my lead from science, not activists.

        • jim karlock

          *David Appell:* I honestly don’t care what Gore says — he does not speak for science. He is an activist, not less than than the AEI or CEI or dozens of conservative institutions (such as those who fund Climatedepot.com).
          *JK:* Many differences.
          Gore lies, time after time.
          Gore continues his lies while most other groups fix problems when found.

          *David Appell:* I take my lead from science, not activists.
          *JK:* Oh, like Phil Jones, lead IPCC author, who said
          2/2/2005: The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think *I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone.* (1107454306.txt)
          ——————-
          Thu May 29, 2008, Subject: IPCC & FOI: *Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?* Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.
          We will be getting Caspar to do likewise. (1212073451.txt)
          —————–
          September 12, 2007: Ammann/Wahl – *try and change the Received date!* Don’t give those skeptics something to amuse themselves with. (1189722851.txt)
          ——————-
          16 Nov 1999: I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature *trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards)* amd from 1961 for Keith’s *to hide the decline.* ( 942777075.txt)
          ————–
          Dec 3, 2008: About 2 months ago *I deleted loads of emails,* so have very little – if anything at all. (1228330629.txt)
          Nov 24, 2009 Guardian: *We’ve not deleted any emails or data here at CRU.*
          (https://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/24/climate-professor-leaked-emails-uea)

          Then there is this from the fabricator of Al Gore’s hockey stick:

          27/10/2009, 16:54: As to the issues of robustness, particularly w.r.t. inclusion of the Yamal series, we actually emphasized that (including the Osborn and Briffa ’06 sensitivity test) in our original post! *As we all know, this isn’t about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.* bold added (1256735067.txt)
          All bold above was added. Google the number in (nn.rxt) to find the entire emails.

          Yep, David, you sure are taking your lead from true scientists.

          Thanks
          JK

      • David Appell

        > JK: Do you consider subverting the peer review process to be science

        Please provide specific examples of where the peer-review process has been “subverted.”

        Details, please.

        As a journalist, I’ve specifically asked the editors of prominent climate journals about influences upon them. NOT ONE has ever indicated that any reader or scientist influences their actions — merely that they attempt to publish the best, most important papers they can.

        • jim karlock

          *David Appell:* Please provide specific examples of where the peer-review process has been “subverted.”
          Details, please.
          *JK:* Glad you asked:

          Phil Jones, IPCC lead author:
          Jul 8 16:30:16 2004: I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – *even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!* (1089318616.txt)
          ———————
          11 Mar 2003: *I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.* A CRU person is on the editorial board, but papers get dealt with by the editor assigned by Hans von Storch. (1047390562.txt)
          —————-
          15/11/2005, Michael E. Mann wrote: *The GRL leak may have been plugged up now* w/ new editorial leadership there, but these guys always have “Climate Research” and “Energy and Environment”, and will go there if necessary. (1132094873.txt)
          ——————-
          24 Apr 2003: *Mike’s idea to get editorial board members to resign* will probably not work — must get rid of von Storch too, otherwise holes will eventually fill up with people like Legates, Balling, Lindzen, Michaels, Singer, etc.(1051190249.txt)
          ————
          Tom Wigley – Contributing Author to Ch 10 of of the 4th UN IPCC report on climate change:
          Oct 14, 2009: …*there have been a number of dishonest presentations* of model results by individual authors and by IPCC. (1255553034.txt)
          ————-
          Edward Cook – Contributing author to Ch 6 of the 4th UN IPCC report on climate change, AR4:
          6/4/03: I got a paper to review (…) that claims that the method of reconstruction that we use in dendroclimatology (reverse regression) is wrong, biased, lousy, horrible, etc. (…) *If published as is, this paper could really do some damage.* (1054756929.txt)

          All bold above was added. Google the number in (nn.rxt) to find the entire emails.

          Is that enough peer review tampering and sleaze for you?

          *David Appell:* As a journalist, I’ve specifically asked the editors of prominent climate journals about influences upon them. NOT ONE has ever indicated that any reader or scientist influences their actions — merely that they attempt to publish the best, most important papers they can.
          *JK:* Did you really expect them to admit to professional misconduct?

          Thanks
          JK

  • David Appell

    JK wrote:
    > The grand-daddy of all is his lies is that the ice cores show CO2 causes warming
    > when they actually show the opposite.

    Baloney. You are welcome to read the works of a real scientist, such as U Maine’s Paul Mayewsk’s “The Ice Chronicles.”

    Mayewski has crawled all over the globe and has lived-and-breathed actual scientific data.

    • jim karlock

      Are you now trying to claim that Al’s ice cores show CO2 leading temperature? If so you are the only one that I know of (but you probably can find a crack port or two to follow.)

      Thanks
      JK

  • David Appell

    > Are you now trying to claim that Al’s ice cores show

    Al Gore has no ice cores.

    Al Gore is merely communicating what field scientists have reported in the scientific literature.

    Until you can recognize this difference, there is no hope we will ever get to the truth.

    • jim karlock

      Are you trying to claim that the majority of scientists think that the ice cores that AL Gore used show CO2 causing temperature?

      Even Mann apologist web site realclimate admits that CO2 follows temperature.

      Face it, David, you have no proof.

      Thanks
      JK

      • David Appell

        > Even Mann apologist web site realclimate admits that CO2 follows temperature.

        No, they don’t. You have misunderstood their message.

        Sometimes CO2 follows temperature. Sometimes it does not. It *especially* does not when we artificially pump CO2 into the atmosphere. Then temperature follows it. That is, after all, why CO2 is called a “greenhouse gas.”

        • jim karlock

          Sure am glad there is a “possibility” of a suitable energy source.

          Do you happen to know of any that actually work NOW, since the carbon reductions are to start real soon.

          BTW, Hydro only supply less than 50% of our power and the progressive fools are advocating tearing out hydro power, not increasing it.

          BTW2: Progressives and liberals are economically illiterate. See Are you smarter than a Fifth Grader https://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703561604575282190930932412.html
          Did you ever study economics?

          Thanks
          JK

        • jim karlock

          You are ignoring the well known fact that, in the antarctic ice core date, CO2 follows, not leads temperature. Even your GOD, the liars at realclimate, admits this:

          “At least three careful ice core studies have shown that CO2 starts to rise about 800 years (600_1000 years) after Antarctic temperature during glacial terminations. These terminations are pronounced warming periods that mark the ends of the ice ages that happen every 100,000 years or so.”
          Realclimate.org/index.php?p=13

          Of course they then engage in twisted logic to try to claim that CO2 really caused the temperature increase.

          Thanks
          JK

  • Steve Plunk

    It took an Al Gore story from the Enquirer to bring out David? What a strange world we live in. Of course it is nice to be present for the last pitiful gasps from the global warming movement. As they circle the wagons to protect one of their own I expect some real nastiness.

    David should get back to city council meetings or high school football games if he wants to be thought of as a ‘journalist’. Right now he assuming the role of apologist.

    • valley p

      “David should get back to city council meetings or high school football games if he wants to be thought of as a ‘journalist’. Right now he assuming the role of apologist. ”

      He is assuming the under appreciated (here) role of being a realist.

  • Rupert in Springfield

    This article was not about global warming, it was about Al Gore being accused of sexual harassment.

    The point is, the accusation has none of the requite evidence and all of the tell tale signs of someone looking to score big.

    The point is, those of us who have no love for Al Gore are willing to call a charge a load of crap, even when the mere accusation is substantially to our advantage.

    The point is liberals would never have the intellectual honesty to do the same thing were circumstances reversed.

    In that respect this story, and its posting here, has some value. The inability of some of our more notable liberal colleagues to be forthright in some of Al Gores AGW tall tales, or the myriad of AGW discrepancies, i.e. the CRU admissions, is now on full display.

    I frankly thought it in bad form for Catalyst to post this article. It seems a cheap shot. But it does provide an exceptional canvas for matters thus noted.

    I think the absurd inability to admit any fault, any gilding of the lilly, in the AFG movement, when such is apparent to all but the devoted, is quite illustrative.

    For that I am thankful.

    • valley p

      “This article was not about global warming, it was about Al Gore being accused of sexual harassment.”

      Right. But why was it posted here at all? I haven’t seen any articles posted here on David Vitter or John Ensign or that lech Republican governor of Nevada or the accusations about the Republican gal running for gov of South Carolina. Most of those are far jucier and more contemporary stories. We get Al Gore because Catalyst and most posters here are obsessed with bringing this guy down in any way they can.

      So yes, it is about global warming, or at least the denial of it.

      And you are right about one thing. it was a cheap shot to post this. Not because it isn’t “news,” unfortunately it is. And for all I know it may be a true event. Old Al may be a secret horndog. Its cheap shot because the only reason they posted it is to heap dung on the guy.

      • jim karlock

        Maybe you didn’t notice, being so observant all the time:

        the alleged incident happened in *Portland*

        Thanks
        JK

      • Anonymous

        Lewinski stained pants will tell the tale, couldn’t have happened to a bigger blowhard. What a farce Al Bore is.

  • Anonymous

    “Old Al may be a secret horndog”

    and a liar, pompous ass, hypocrite and unethical jerk.

    Exactly the same as James Hansen, Gavin Schmidt, Michael Mann, Joe Romm, Jane Lubchenco and David.

    https://climateaudit.org/2005/02/22/mann-and-the-hockey-stick/
    “Hagiography” according to Wordnet, at Princeton University means “a biography that idealizes or idolizes the person (especially a person who is a saint)”.

    Now that you know this, try reading this Scientific American article written by David Appell about Michael Mann, creator of the Hockey Stick.

    I’ve quite a strong stomach, but it’s difficult to keep digestive juices in their proper location when faced with a description filled with this much schmalz. It’s interesting to me that David Appell doesn’t bother with any hard questions about Michael Mann’s “science”, preferring instead to let the saintliness shine through:

    Michael Mann knows his students and his subject. The topic of the graduate seminar: El Nino and radiative forcing. The beer he will be serving: Corona, “because I’m going to be talking about tropical climate.” Not surprisingly, attendance is high.
    Be honest, were you thinking about the classroom scene in “Raiders of the Lost Ark”? Maybe some women were writing love messages on their eyelids…personally I think you can pack any lecture on any subject when you offer students free beer for attending. (Yes, I’m cynical)

    Appell’s purple prose is packed full of leading statements and meaningless phrases:

    • valley p

      “Exactly the same as James Hansen, Gavin Schmidt, Michael Mann, Joe Romm, Jane Lubchenco and David.”

      Thanks for making my point.

  • Ron Glynn

    I had to put my 2 cents worth in on this one. For starters, I think Gore is a complete fraud and I hate his guts. His manmade global warming scam is the biggest swindle in the history of mankind. Having said that, this current dust up is a bunch of baloney. The supposed victim never pursued the issue. She needs to shut her mouth and go away. Even though Gore is a jerk, he does not deserve this B.S.

    • Anonymous

      Lewinski stained pants!!!

    • Anonymous

      This is the least of what he deserves. Have you heard that him and Tipper are hiding there money in trusts, so as to avoid losing any of their massive fortune to any lawsuits by any number of his little honey’s. What an absolute Gasbag he is.