Those opposed to climate action in order to extend their own short-term benefits from societal reliance on fossil fuels have been producing bad science reports and fake controversies for years. One big effort along these lines was the Wegman report. It turns out that not only was this report a case of bad science, it was also a case of plagiarism.
An influential 2006 congressional report that raised questions about the validity of global warming research was partly based on material copied from textbooks, Wikipedia and the writings of one of the scientists criticized in the report, plagiarism experts say.
Review of the 91-page report by three experts contacted by USA TODAY found repeated instances of passages lifted word for word and what appear to be thinly disguised paraphrases.
Wow, who would have thought the authors of this report would stoop so low.
I love this quote from the USA TODAY piece: “It kind of undermines the credibility of your work criticizing others’ integrity when you don’t conform to the basic rules of scholarship,” Virginia Tech plagiarism expert Skip Garner says.
Of course it does.
Climate Progress has an excellent, extremely in-depth piece covering and re-posting the findings published in USA TODAY and then going into climate science in a little more detail, discussing numerous scientific bodies and reports that have backed up the hockey stick graph that the Wegman report tried (very poorly) to take down.
I highly recommend you head over there to read more on this topic: Wegman exposed: Experts find “shocking” plagiarism in 2006 climate report requested by Joe Barton (R-TX)
Image Credit: Climate Progress