iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Charles Monnett Under Investigation For Scientific Misconduct Involving Polar Bears

Polar Bear

BECKY BOHRER   07/28/11 10:33 PM ET   AP

JUNEAU, Alaska — Just five years ago, Charles Monnett was one of the scientists whose observation that several polar bears had drowned in the Arctic Ocean helped galvanize the global warming movement.

Now, the wildlife biologist is on administrative leave and facing accusations of scientific misconduct.

The federal agency where he works told him he was on leave pending the results of an investigation into "integrity issues." A watchdog group believes it has to do with the 2006 journal article about the bear, but a source familiar with the investigation said late Thursday that placing Monnett on leave had nothing to with scientific integrity or the article.

The source, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the ongoing investigation, wouldn't comment further.

The watchdog, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, filed a complaint on Monnett's behalf Thursday with the agency, the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement.

Investigators have not yet told Monnett of the specific charges or questions related to the scientific integrity of his work, said Jeff Ruch, the watchdog group's executive director. His group released excerpts of interviews investigators conducted with Monnett and fellow researcher Jeffrey Gleason, in which they were questioned about the observations that led to the article.

Whatever the outcome, the investigation comes at a time when climate change activists and those who are skeptical about global warming are battling over the credibility of scientists' work.

Members of both sides, however, said that it was too early to make any pronouncements about the case, particularly since the agency has not yet released the details of the allegations against him.

Myron Ebell, of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said the case reinforces the group's position that people should be more skeptical about the work of climate change scientists.

Even if every scientist is objective, "what we're being asked to do is turn our economy around and spend trillions and trillions of dollars on the basis of" climate change claims, he said.

Francesca Grifo, director of the scientific integrity program for the Union of Concerned Scientists, said she's not alarmed by the handling of the case so far.

Grifo said the allegations made in the complaint filed by Ruch's group are premature and said people should wait to see what, if anything, comes of the inspector general's investigation.

Beyond the climate change debate, the investigation also focuses attention on an Obama administration policy intended to protect scientists from political interference.

The complaint seeks Monnett's reinstatement and a public apology from the agency and inspector general, whose office is conducting the probe.

The group's filing also seeks to have the investigation dropped or to have the charges specified and the matter carried out quickly and fairly, as the Obama policy states.

BOEMRE, which oversees leasing and development of offshore drilling, was created last year in the reorganization of the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service, which oversaw offshore drilling.

The MMS was abolished after the massive Gulf of Mexico oil spill. The agency was accused of being too close to oil and gas industry interests. A congressional report last year found MMS Alaska was vulnerable to lawsuits and allegations of scientific misconduct.

The agency announced steps to improve.

On July 18, BOEMRE told the longtime Anchorage-based Monnett that he was being put on leave, pending the investigation, according to the complaint. BOEMRE has barred Monnett from speaking to reporters, Ruch said.

Monnett could not immediately be reached Thursday.

His wife, Lisa Rotterman, a fellow scientist who worked with Monnett for years, including at BOEMRE's predecessor agency, said the case did not come out of the blue.

Rotterman said Monnett had come under fire in the past within the agency for speaking the truth about what the science showed. She said the 2006 article wasn't framed in the context of climate change but was relevant to the topic.

She feared what happened to Monnett would send a "chilling message" at the agency just as important oil and gas development decisions in the Arctic will soon be made.

"I don't believe the timing is coincidental," she said.

Rotterman said Monnett's work included identifying questions that needed to be answered to inform the environmental analyses the agency must conduct before issuing drilling permits.

"This is a time when sowing doubt in the public's mind about whether those findings can be trusted or not, that makes people think, I don't know what to believe," she said.

Monnett coordinated much of BOEMRE's research on Arctic wildlife and ecology, had duties that included managing about $50 million worth of studies, according to the complaint.

The agency said other scientists would manage the studies in his absence.

According to documents provided by Ruch's group, which sat in on investigators' interviews with Monnett, the questioning focused on observations that he and researcher Jeffrey Gleason made in 2004.

At the time, they were conducting an aerial survey of bowhead whales, and saw four dead polar bears floating in the water after a storm. There were other witnesses, according to Ruch, and low-resolution photos show floating white blobs.

Monnett and Gleason detailed their observations in an article published two years later in the journal Polar Biology. In the peer-reviewed article, they said they were reporting, to the best of their knowledge, the first observations of the bears floating dead and presumed drowned while apparently swimming long distances.

Polar bears are considered strong swimmers, they wrote, but long-distance swims may exact a greater metabolic toll than standing or walking on ice in better weather.

They said their observations suggested the bears drowned in rough seas and high winds. They also added that the findings "suggest that drowning-related deaths of polar bears may increase in the future if the observed trend of regression of pack ice and/or longer open water periods continues."

The article and presentations drew national attention and helped make the polar bear a symbol for the global warming movement. Former vice president and climate change activist Al Gore mentioned the animal in his Oscar-winning global warming documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth."

The complaint said agency officials harassed Gleason and Monnett, and that they received negative comments after the journal article. Gleason took another Interior Department job; he didn't respond to an email and a BOEMRE spokeswoman said he wouldn't be available for comment.

In May 2008, the bear was classified as a threatened species, the first with its survival at risk due to global warming.

According to a transcript, provided by Ruch's group, Ruch asked investigator Eric May, during questioning of Monnett in February, for specifics about the allegations. May replied: "well, scientific misconduct, basically, uh, wrong numbers, uh, miscalculations."

Monnett said that alleging scientific misconduct "suggests that we did something deliberately to deceive or to, to change it. Um, I sure don't see any indication of that in what you're asking me about."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

JUNEAU, Alaska — Just five years ago, Charles Monnett was one of the scientists whose observation that several polar bears had drowned in the Arctic Ocean helped galvanize the global warming mov...
JUNEAU, Alaska — Just five years ago, Charles Monnett was one of the scientists whose observation that several polar bears had drowned in the Arctic Ocean helped galvanize the global warming mov...
Filed by Chris Gentilviso  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 299
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
01:20 PM on 09/02/2011
We have satellite photos of the ice caps, ice shelfs etc. What could be easier than to publish photos of 20 years ago and today and compare them? We've been in space for 40 years so certainly someone must have remembered to take some snapshots.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ellamenta
Oh no! My microbio has gone viral!
02:14 PM on 08/10/2011
This news is frightening, although not surprising.
We need to find out who is pushing this investigation. Surely the inspector general's office of the Dept. of the Interior has more important things to do with its meager resources than harassing scientists. Even after he is exonerated, the chilling and damaging effects of the harassment and interruption of his work will remain.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:27 PM on 08/10/2011
This just puts another nail in the coffin of the ill conceived farce called Global Warming.
photo
jumpingjackflash
Liberalism will ultimately destroy America.
03:00 AM on 08/07/2011
Don't you global warming people get tired of defending this fraud? Even NASA's data doesn't support it. It's time to give up and admit it's all been a fabrication.
photo
gomezrules
Why Don't We Do It In The Road?
04:06 PM on 08/04/2011
I wonder what the AlGore has to say about this?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris 1
06:00 PM on 08/02/2011
The polar as victim story was always joke scientifically;

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/190805/20110802/polar-bear-global-warming-extinction-climate-change-research-world-wide-fund-wwf-geological-survey-s.htm

2 X Bears and the get hunted and killed all the time. Yet, because it fits a purpose as AGW mascot hacks in government get them on to endangered lists.

Quackery.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris 1
10:55 PM on 08/01/2011
Here we are on an obscure back page at HP, this thread was taken off the main "Climate Change" topic title in one day. Regardless my links get censored and this story is far more important and telling than piles of the "world is ending" nonsense that are the usual HP features.

The left's mantra? Ignorance is strength.

Got government science crony corruption?:

http://www.c3headlines.com/2011/08/big-green-corrupting-science-at-noaa-to-achieve-a-political-agenda.html
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris 1
03:38 PM on 08/01/2011
yes, it gets better. That wonderful "peer review" standard which really means "politically correct" in climate science;

http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2011/08/more-on-polarbeargate-interview-with.html

His wife "peer reviewed" the twaddle of a paper!!

What a joke!
photo
girldog
I support Elizabeth Warren
07:45 PM on 07/30/2011
Sounds like Charles Monnett believes it's all about big oil. I'm sure he is right. Here's a link to the farce of an "interview" with special agent Eric May back in February:

http://thinkprogress.org/green/2011/07/29/282651/after-polar-bear-scientist-criticized-investigator-for-stupid-and-goofy-math-he-was-persecuted/
photo
DocSkull
My questions aren't rhetorical.
11:01 PM on 07/30/2011
That interview certainly sounds like it is about science, and that the recent claims that his suspension has nothing to do with it aren't very genuine.

It is just a guess, but I think Monnett's not-so-bright critics added 3 dead bears to the 4 live bears and then divided by the 11-percent survey for 0.636 percent, and then incorrectly rounded down. As Monnett says the correct figure is a simple 3:4 proportion.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
06:43 PM on 07/31/2011
Other than the fact that the numbskull, Eric May, has all the power in that conflict, that is one hilarious story.
photo
girldog
I support Elizabeth Warren
07:02 PM on 07/30/2011
Here's a link to a 2007 interview with Monnett, just published yesterday. It says, in part:

I wanted to interview the man who had made the polar bear an international symbol of global warming. But the federal agency he worked for, which at the time was defending Royal Dutch Shell's plans to drill for oil in Alaska's Arctic, was wary of me asking questions of their scientist. And Monnett himself was paranoid that he would get in trouble by talking to me. As is today, Royal Dutch Shell was facing environmental opposition to its drilling plans for the Arctic. MMS was caught in the middle. And the survival of the polar bear -- now listed as a threatened species -- was at the center of the debate. Monnett seemed to indicate that he was already on thin ice as a result of his research. Thus, an MMS spokeswoman was there to monitor my questioning of Monnett. That's how it seemed, at least.

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/lost-interview-alaska-scientist-described-how-he-discovered-drowned-polar-bears
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
06:52 PM on 07/30/2011
Heartland Institute's Bob Carter committed global warming fraud.*

Heartland Institute propaganda mislead Bzakey3 downthread into believing that NASA "has discovered that much more heat escapes the atmosphere than has been programmed into the alarmist climate modellers."

The Heartland Institute's latest success at misleading the public is par for the Heartland Institute's course. For example:

Heartland Institute global warming "expert" Dr. Robert M. "Bob" Carter committed climate science fraud whereby Dr. Carter deceptively tried to Hide the Incline of the global warming temperature trend over recent decades, as statistician Tamino demonstrates.*

Bob Carter is also a leader of and/or major contributor to other prominent organizations that are "skeptical " of man-made global warming / climate change as well, including the Science & Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), and the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC).

On a related note Executive Director of the ICSC Tom Harris repeatedly refused to address Bob Carter's fraud in the "Investigation Hits at Climate Change Denier's 'Science'" thread.**

----------
* http://tamino.wordpress.com/2011/07/13/bob-carter-does-his-business/

** http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/social/Publicola/climate-change-denial_b_896543_97738177.html
photo
girldog
I support Elizabeth Warren
07:12 PM on 07/30/2011
Thanks for the Bob Carter link. How do these frauds get taken seriously by anybody?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
06:45 PM on 07/31/2011
Bribery, mostly in the form of campaign donations and advertising spending.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ClimateHawk
Think before posting.
04:48 PM on 07/30/2011
Read the original article.

http://www.alaskaconservationsolutions.com/acs/images/stories/docs/Polar%20Bears-ExtendedOpenWaterSwimmingMortality.pdf

I hope we get the complete story soon.

"We further suggest that drowning-related deaths of polar bears may increase in the future if the observed trend of regression of pack ice and/or longer open water periods continues."

Five years later, we can see the trend better:

http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20101004_Figure3.png
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ClimateHawk
Think before posting.
04:49 PM on 07/30/2011
better URL: http://tinyurl.com/ydrcyhq
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris 1
04:36 PM on 07/30/2011
If you read the minutes it's interesting how he's looking for a science peer, knowing of course they are likely to share all of his political and cultural bias t help him weasel out of the garbage produced. Climate and natural studies are club like the teachers union or government workers in general. It's us vs. them and the arrogance shown on his part bleeds through the pages; "do you know who I am??" It's just part of the liberal elite culture and it shows right through.

He didn't see a dead polar bear for six years, he had know idea why they died but the eco-polemic is the first course of action. This is what you call science?
photo
DocSkull
My questions aren't rhetorical.
11:08 PM on 07/30/2011
"If you read the minutes it's interestin­g how he's looking for a science peer, knowing of course they are likely to share all of his political and cultural bias..."

Monnett doesn't need bias, he just needs someone who understands that if 3 of every 4 bears drown, only 25-percent live. It is a simple fact that elites and non-elites should be able to agree upon.

"...he had know [no] idea why they died...."

How do you think the bears swimming in the ocean died?

Chris1, don't you agree that 4 bears - 3 dead bears = 1 live bear therefore 1 in 4 bears live?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReedYoung
global mean temperature, obviously INCREASING
06:40 PM on 07/31/2011
Obviously they were all attacked by rabid baby seals.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ecolke
Judge a man's character by how he treats animals.
07:31 PM on 08/19/2011
No, that is standard procedure. The reason is you get people like Eric May, who rail Monnett on his 'stats' (they weren't stats) and the criminal investigator can't even calculate ratios!
04:01 PM on 07/30/2011
Excellent news! One of the main culprits of the AGW alarmist cause is being brought to account, and his alleged naughties scrutinised.

It's been a bad time for the warmists recently - let's recap on a few things, shall we?

1. The polar bear population has increased five-fold since 1960, and they're positively thriving;
2. NASA has discovered that much more heat escapes the atmosphere than has been programmed into the alarmist climate modellers;
3. Severe/wild weather is at a 40-year low;
4. Sea level rise has tailed off from minimal to insignificant;
5. The planet is getting greener, not browner - with a net increase in plant life;
6. The sun is in a quiet phase, and is likely to be so until mid-century - increasing the chances that the current cooling phase will continue;
7. There has been no increase in atmospheric aerosols, despite the recent warmist attempts to blame this for the slight cooling over the last 15 years;
8. There is no catastrophic loss of ice sheets or glaciers;
9. Drought severity and duration has tailed off markedly (not withstanding the sad events in Africa at the moment);
10. It has been shown that marine diversity thrives in warmer climes and coral reefs are surprisingly robust in warmer waters and reduced alkalinity.

That's my top ten for now.

All-in-all it's been a great time for us climate realists recently, and I look forward to Climategate 2.0 which is about to break.
photo
ILoveFiction
That's unbelievable!
05:18 PM on 07/30/2011
Shirley you jest.

NASA found what?
photo
gallon
Those who fail to remember history are, um
08:19 PM on 07/30/2011
Shirley is Earnest.
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
06:29 PM on 07/30/2011
Heartland Institute Global Warming Propagada.

Addressing but one of Bzakey3's Top 10 disinformation recaps.

Bzakey3: "NASA has discovered that much more heat escapes the atmosphere than has been programmed into the alarmist climate modellers."

You have been taken in by the Heartland Institute's latest global warming science denier propaganda campaign, Bzakey3. I recommend that you read and try to understand the actual science instead.
photo
girldog
I support Elizabeth Warren
06:47 PM on 07/30/2011
"Bzakey3: "NASA has discovered that much more heat escapes the atmosphere than has been programmed into the alarmist climate modellers"

NASA discovered no such thing. You are referring to a study co-authored by Roy Spencer.
Here's a little more about Roy:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Roy-Spencers-Great-Blunder-Part-1.html
photo
Publicola
Reality has a scientific bias
05:12 AM on 07/31/2011
Heartland Institute - Global Warming Fraud Committed by Heartland's Bob Carter*

The Heartland Institute's latest success at misleading the public with respect to Roy Spencer's NASA satellite data interpretation is par for the Heartland Institute's course. For example:

Heartland Institute global warming "expert" Bob Carter committed global warming fraud whereby Bob Carter deceptively tried to Hide The Incline of the global warming temperature trend over recent decades, as statistician Tamino demonstrates.*

Bob Carter is a leader of and/or major contributor to other prominent organizations that are "skeptical " of man-made global warming / climate change as well, including the International Climate Science Coalition (ICSC).

Hey Bzakey3,

Do you agree Dr. Bob Carter has committed global warming fraud as demonstrated by Tamino in the link that I have provided here? 

If 'no' please explain in scientific detail how in your mind the lines indicating flat temperature trends that Bob Carter drew on Roy Spencer's UAH satellite data as shown by Tamino are statistically and scientifically valid; thank you.

On a related note Executive Director of the ICSC Tom Harris repeatedly refused to address Bob Carter's global warming fraud in the "Investigation Hits at Climate Change Denier's 'Science'" thread.**

----------
* http://tamino.wordpress.com/2011/07/13/bob-carter-does-his-business/

** http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/social/Publicola/climate-change-denial_b_896543_97738177.html
03:07 PM on 07/30/2011
I've been following this story via several online news outlets and in the comments sections I notice one simple glaring fact. Almost no one has actually READ Monnett's 2006 paper.

It's a really short, easy to read paper that is available for free with a simple google search. If you're going to comment on this issue, at least have the temerity to inform yourself first. I know that's a lot to ask....