Last week, just in time for the 4th of July weekend, not to mention a serious lack of media coverage, the “Climategate” professor was cleared of all charges:

Penn State University gave final vindication to one of the most prominent scientists caught up in the affair, Michael E. Mann.

Dr. Mann, director of Penn State's Earth System Science Center, was a target of climate change skeptics even before the release of the e-mails, but the subsequent controversy moved the university to investigate. In early February, a committee reported back that there was no credible evidence that Dr. Mann had engaged in any actions with the intent to suppress or falsify data; similarly, he had not tried to delete or conceal e-mails and had not engaged in any misuse of privileged or confidential information. The committee only held off on declaring whether Dr. Mann had committed any serious deviation from accepted academic practices, saying that more review was necessary.

Last week, that verdict was returned. By unanimous vote, a new investigatory committee found there was no substance to the final allegation. For Dr. Mann, it is vindication. For the continuing debate on climate change and what to do about it -- a subject in the process of being taken up by Congress -- it removes an unfounded distraction. (emphasis added)

The next question, of course, is will those who pimped the false charges acknowledge they acted imprudently and issue apologies? For example, State Rep Matt Wingard found the time to take to the House floor last year and make this speech:

Well of course he won’t. Rep Wingard has no interest in the truth regarding climate change; his worldview cannot accept the possibility that human industrial activity could have a down-side worse than allowing government to tax corporations. The science on the matter is incontrovertible, but that’s irrelevant. Wingard, like all those opposed to making the changes necessary to avoid a rapidly approaching disaster too spectacular for even Jerry Bruckheimer and Michael Bay, is satisfied to “debunk” fact via name-calling, cherry-picked “facts” and other rhetorical tricks that have nothing to do with the real work, much science and the earth’s climate.

The sad truth is that climate change is far less about science than it is about belief systems. For those who believe in science, the facts as we currently know them (and this is knowledge built by tens of thousands of scientists over decades of work) is that the planet is in serious trouble. Human activity over the past few centuries has had a cumulative effect on the atmosphere and we are not reaping the results. For those whose faith lies elsewhere, or who lack the understanding of science but appreciate self-serving fear, the science can’t possibly be right. The sky is too big, and winters are too cold, and weather is just weather after all. No amount of “fact” will ever convince someone who does not believe in the source of those facts.

Matt Wingard is probably going to return to the Oregon Legislature next year, and he, along with others who share his faith in things non-scientific (whether that be God, money or power) will fight to halt whatever steps others in the Leg may take to help our state put the brakes on the runaway train of climate change. He’s wrong in this, but no amount of “proof” will shake his faith in — whatever it is he has faith in (that’s not for me to say). Those of us who know better need to understand that to save the planet, we have to beat people like Wingard politically. We cannot argue our way to victory (and safety); we have to whup his ass politically.

It’s that simple. “Climategate” was bogus from the get-go, and that’s been proven. The nay-sayers like Rep Wingard don’t care, however. They will remain part of the problem. So let’s suck it up and do what we need to do to save the planet:

Let’s beat Wingard’s ass in the politics of this battle.

Here's some good follow-up material:

A review of the "Climategate" charges, and refutations, from Huff Post.

A Columbia Univ professor discusses the issue, and gives some common sense understanding of climate science (and science in general) -- in Popular Mechanics. Excellent piece.