Friday
Oct082010
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Mann in WaPo
Oct 8, 2010 Climate: Mann Michael Mann has an op-ed in the Washington Post.
My fellow scientists and I must be ready to stand up to blatant abuse from politicians who seek to mislead and distract the public. They are hurting American science. And their failure to accept the reality of climate change will hurt our children and grandchildren, too.
H/T Messenger
Reader Comments (96)
Thems fighting words Dung. Just consider the dangers of gnome vs troll, if the gnome's carrying a pair of straight razors, a spiked helm and a pogo stick. Especially if all you've got is bandy legs and an armoured skirt.
Dung
"The Alliance and The Horde"
Just about sums up the UK, and Dung would be an excellent name for a double agent, let me know how you get on.
Ban him Bish!
Dung says:
'Both within my game and in the real world I figure Dung is the right name to use ^.^'
Thank you for the enlightenment. I rest easy now.
BBD
et tu Brutus :(
Saw the comments about posting as real name. Michael Mann et al get paid to do this stuff, I do not. I give my free time as a service to humanity and truth (/sarcasm). I still have day job in dodgy evil fossil fuel business...and so my real name remains anonymous. Of course the irony is that because I have posted (and of course been censured at) RC, Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt must know my real name. I would lay money they checked my online bio, which means they also know I have some relevent qualifications...
/friday
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Physics_doesn%27t_exist,_it%27s_all_about_Gnomes
this is why climate models don't work.
I think the following applies to the original topic and the off-topic wanderings of Dung et al...
"I for one welcome our new black dragon overlords."
Atomic - "....The third one shouts: "We've hit it!""
Gem! :-)
Mann is a smart cookie, when Jones emailed and asked him to delete the emails and pass the message on to a collegue on holiday he came back to say he had passed the email on. The reply never said he had deleted any emails but was enough for Jones to infer he had. Then later at the investigation of Mann where Mann was asked did he delete any emails hes says no and dangles a memory stick with some emails on.
So he hung Jones out to dry but also made sure the emails were only accessable through himself and were not properly archived.
It woould seem that The Hockey Stick Illusion has had another favorable review. WUWT is reporting the resignation of Hal Lewis from the American Physical Society here
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/08/hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society/
and the letter itself is avaliable of the GWPF website here
http://thegwpf.org/ipcc-news/1670-hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society.html
The letter reads in part :
"...It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford's book organizes the facts very well.) I don't believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist...
The letter is devastating.
Oh, Mann. Is this guy delusional, or what?
As Roger Stone says: "Admit nothing, deny everything, launch counterattack."
Mann has consistently followed this advice, hasn't given an inch, unlike Jones, who I'm sure Mann now derides as a total wimp and turncoat.
Bloody Hell!
Mann is hopeless. He also says that increasing levels of anthropogenic generated CO2:
"Overloading the atmosphere with carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is heating the planet, shrinking the Arctic ice cap, melting glaciers and raising sea levels. It is leading to more widespread drought, more frequent heat waves and more powerful hurricanes." Notice the absolute certainty and the lack of any caveats. I have seen no data that supports these sweeping conclusions. As far as I can tell more widespread droughts, more frequent heat waves and more powerful hurricanes lack observational support and are very much a matter of scientific debate.
The Mashey/Wegman issue needs some discussion.
Is it just me, but Michael Mann seems to be writing more and more on the MSM?
Why is it that they're letting him tell his story, and not having regular opinion formers write his stuff for him, and write it better?
I think they're hanging him out to dry.
And when he's dead, they'll just say that they didn't write none of it, but just gave him a forum.
They're walking away.
If it wasn't for "politicians who seek to mislead and distract the public", Mann would never have had a job in the first place.
Election politics in America! Pulling out all the stops to 'hide the decline' in public support and beat back the Republican resurgence it's helping to drive. Bravo Mr. Mann, with your help your friends on the left are doomed. He's as much as admitting it, bleating pre-emptively against the inevitable oversight and transparency the people he's campaigning against will bring.
I guess the good Dr. Mann doesn’t want to confuse the issue with inconsistencies and doubts. The science is settled.
Overloading the atmosphere with carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels
Just how much of the "Greenhouse Effect" is caused by human activity?
It is about 0.28%, if water vapor is taken into account-- about 5.53%, if not.
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
is heating the planet,
Kevin Trenberth doesn’t agree
http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/where-heck-is-global-warming-kevin.html
shrinking the Arctic ice cap,
Not in recent years
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm
http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/observation_images/ssmi_ice_area.png
melting glaciers
Eurasia ... actually has an increase in glacier area, as increased precipitation may have offset the influence of warming in this region
http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/detect/ice-glacier.shtml
glaciers in the western Himalaya region are actually increasing in size
http://environmentallegal.blogs.com/sholzer/2006/08/glacier_size_in.html
The scientists' conclusion puts the vanishing glaciers of the past 150 years into an entirely new context: "Over of the past 10,000 years, fifty percent of the time, the glaciers were smaller than today," Joerin states in an essay written together with his doctoral advisor Christian Schluechter. They call it the "Green Alps" theory.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1425559/posts
and raising sea levels.
“We see a rise in sea level that is below the estimate of the IPCC and we see no acceleration through the past five decades. Basically, nothing seems to be happening with sea level that is remotely out of the ordinary.”
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2008/05/06/slower-sea-level-rise/
It is leading to more widespread drought,
Results show that the area covered by dry events (SPI-3 and SPI-24<−1) increased during the first 45 years of the time record, while there was a decrease in the latest ten years or so.
http://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/13/1519/2009/hess-13-1519-2009.pdf
results clearly demonstrate that for this portion of the European continent, 20th-century global warming did not result in more frequent or more severe droughts
http://www.co2science.org/subject/d/summaries/droughteurope.php
more frequent heat waves
Although all stations in Ontario have shown an increase in warm spell duration during 1950-2003, none of these trends are statistically significant.
http://ontario.hazards.ca/maps/trends/wsdi_ON-e.html
and more powerful hurricanes.
Current Year-to-Date analysis of Northern Hemisphere and Global Tropical Cyclone Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) AND Power Dissipation Index (PDI) has fallen even further than during the previous 3-years. The global activity is at 33-year lows and at a historical record low where Typhoons form in the Western Pacific.
http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/
I took the bother to follow Eli Rabbett's bait, at the cost of adding another hit to his website (the reason he tosses cryptic contributions from beneath the bridge over which Billy Goats Gruff are crossing - anything for a hit on his blog).
For those who don't know him, he is apparently Joshua B. Halpern, a chemistry professor at Howard University, who does not appear to have any publications directly relevant to the science of climate change.
The 'lawyering up' of Wegman is his logical stretch from a comment from Wegman that there is some 'litigation', because Mann-coauthor has lodged a plagiarism complaint against both Wegman and several of his graduate students. The basis for this complaint appears to be a the almost obsessive work by computer scientist (again, no climate change publications) John Mashey. Many of the graduate students accused by Mashey contributed to the Wegman Report.
Curious, I looked briefly at some of Mashey's 'evidence'. I stress SOME. Much of the case seems weak: several claims of plagiarism amount to claims that paraphrasing does not differ sufficiently from the source, and (since the source is attributed) would not pass as plagiarism in a student essay. At best, it would draw a cautionary margin note. (In an age when we in universities are dealing with passages copied verbatim, this would not get past square one).
Much of the material referred to is simply descriptive of basic science, with variations on passages like 'carbohydrates are fermented to produce alcohol.' Mashet seems to get very excited that paraphrasing of that yields text like' carbohydrates are femented to make alcohol', and it has a lot of words in common. (Try paraphrasing a basic statement in science and NOT use a lot of words in common!)
I found no evidence produced of what would constitute serious plagiarism: wholesale lifting of results unattributed.
But let's assume that there is plagiarism of a serious kind in what is a essentially a lit review in the Wegman Report. I am open to that possibility: after a quick cost-benefit analysis, I did not think it worth reading further. (Life is too short!) Would it change the basis of the findings of the Wegman Report? Not at all.
Much of Mashey's critique centres on the use of social network analysis. If you want a laugh, look at Mashey's own attempts to link Bjorn Lomborg to conservative think tanks on the basis that they like what he has written, which supposedly corrupted his writings. Cause usually precedes effect, John! Wegman's SNA, in contrast, is an analysis of cooperation through authorship among the paleoclimate community.
Mann must be insane to have even considered this op-ed. 10 pages of comments up to now over at the W.P. and the vast majority absolutely pasting Mann! Cuccinelli must be rubbing his hands in glee!
Someone take pity on Mann and take the shovel out of his hands, The grave is way to deep already!
@Atomic
'LA Law begat a flurry of law students which exceed placements to do post-grad work and practice. Same with the dot com boom and bust. Green Uni courses are just the latest bubble and there's no doubt thousands of students doing courses that will give them little or no useful skills to serve the wider economy'.
And the world will soon have a glut of forensic science technicians - Gil Grissom and Horatio Caine have a lot to answer for!. Juts shows that You Can Get Fooled Again
I picked up on the resignation of Hal Lewis from the APS in the comments at the W.P. and have just been over to WUWT to read the full version.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/08/hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society/
It would appear there is hope for honest science!
See New Zealand Climate Science Coalition article by Hans Schreuder: Lots of Climate truth Snippets including this one:
All ye who have “data” to prove that the above is NOT true, put it on the table and let the world see it. So far, after more than 20 years of “research”, NOT ONE SHRED OF ACTUAL EVIDENCE HAS EVER BEEN PUT ON ANY TABLE, NOT ONE!
And this one:
In every 85,800 molecules of air, 33 are CO2. Of those, humans just produce one. That the UN IPCC and Al Gore claim that one (1) molecule of CO2 in 85,800 molecules of air catastrophically warms the planet is nonsense. That the UN IPCC and Al Gore claim that one (1) molecule of human CO2 causes catastrophic warming while the remaining 32 molecules of Nature’s identical CO2 do not is insanity. " Hans Schreuder, retired analyst.
And, this is my favourite:
In God and Nature, we trust. All others bring data.
So, Mikey baby. You've been hiding your so called "evidence" for years now. Time to let it out, see the light of day and let it be judged impartially.
How about it?
Peter Walsh
Michael Mann has just been to Las Vegas apparently.
He has been playing a card game in one of the Casinos.
Here is a conversation transcript from one of his games:
Mann: I win, give me the money.
Croupier: Please show us your cards Mr Mann,
Mann: Why should I, I've won, now give me the money.
Croupier: You'll have to show us your cards Mr Mann to prove you have won.
Mann: No, I won't show you my cards, you'll just have to believe me. Now give me the money.
Croupier: I can't give you the money unless you show me your cards.
Mann; When I make a claim about anything, everyone believes me without having to show my cards.
Now, just believe me and give me the money........
Peter Walsh
Mann is still burdened by the delusions of grandeur which I think have had some part to play in the politicisation of climate science over the past 40 years or so. 'Saving the planet' and being a 'prophet of doom' are occupations which are capable of seriously distracting many of us poor mortals, and leading us into dubious liaisons within and around the UN, for example, and into aiding and abetting politicians who can spot a promising bandwagon when it trundles into sight. Thus is created a mutually-beneficial, mutually reinforcing system - one that may merge in due course into a single entity, much as a political class in the UK has been formed by a gradual erosion of the separation of media and government.
Hal Lewis has seen the light (see 6:50am post by Pete Hates for a link):
'I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
…
In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.'
Odd how most scientist would relish, maybe even pay someone (with grant money), to testify at a Congressional hearing. James Hansen seemed to do alright. One supposes pushing self-interest is a bit different from defending fraud charges.
What should be a real treat is when Dr. John Holdron. Next time Mann is called to testify, he should take the fifth. Same for Hansen. After all, there are some in the GOP Congressional groups that know quite a bit about climate fraudsters and their works.
But, as a strategy, trying to cut off testimony under oath is fine with me. Shouldn't work but like the old tort of criminal conversation, no harm in asking.
What an idiot! He calls himself a climate scientist and then trots out this unproven assertion about anthropogenic CO2:
"It is leading to more widespread drought, more frequent heat waves and more powerful hurricanes."
Oh yeah, MM, well if that's the fruit of your brand of "American science" then I'd rather stick to real science, thank you very much.
What a snivelling, whining example of the worst of science he is. He is the one hurting future generations by this drivel and trash, bringing science into disrepute.
Lubos does a nice job on Mann
http://motls.blogspot.com/2010/10/mickey-man-agw-science-depends-on.html
I can do no better than quote from the End of the World sketch from Beyond the Fringe 1961 (was it really that long ago?)
It had better get a move on; they've been threatening us with these doomsday scenarios for years yet somehow they refuse to happen.
“Having first determined the question according to his will, Mann then resorts to experience, and bending her to conformity with his placets, leads her about like a captive in a procession.”
(With apologies to Francis Bacon 1561-1626)
I'm a day late but when I first read the title:
Get the anti-science bent out of politics
I instantly thought it should have been:
Get the politics out of the anti-science bent of Climate Science
...and of course as others have mentioned even he admits to being part of the politics.
"Edward Wegman lawyers up. There gotta be a quickie book in this one too Says Eli Rabbet from Crooklyn".
Of course Eli from Crooklyn doesn't tell you that Mick Mann also lawyered up too.
"Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad" Medea by Euripides
I am waiting to see the the lightning bolt to zap you, but it will come, Mikey, it will come.
My own response to the WaPo:
Bish
Can you tell Latimer Alder to stop posting in drag, it lowers the tone of the whole site ^.^
Wow. Give him all the column inches he wants.
The arrogance is stunning; even John Q Public can see that. Self-appointed spokesman for "American Science"? Good LorDah!
He reveals himself.
Dear Mr Mann
(Is he copywrited to the Mr Men btw?)
First ref climate Change, The evidence I have seen suggests that during 80% of the Earth's past life it coped very well with temperatures about 10 degrees C higher than today.
Second it is not the fault of the planet that man chose to flourish in a climate that has a snowball in Hell's chance of continuing much longer (Interglacial warming accounts for only 1% of the Earth's climate history).
Third I am not aware of any politician trying to distract the public from the reality of climate change. However almost all politicians and all scientists of your opinion are distracting the public from the danger of a return to ice age and the danger of taking CO2 out of our atmosphere.
Dung
I think your self-confessed near-alcoholism has teetered over the edge - as your last post makes no sense to me. Please explain!
LA - wearing normal male attire.
LA
I reject totally that I am a nearly alcoholic.
However I nedsh shpecific detailsh of whish bit you didntnt undershtand hic.
Dung...the bit about me posting in drag!
And - I fear you are yet closer to the edge than you think...Don't Go There!!!! It Is Not A Tourist Destination!!!
You have confessed to being a near alcoholic several times on this blog, and I am worried about you (serious remark, meant to help).
LA
I am truly grateful for your concern however I was stone cold sober when I wrote the post ^.^
An open letter to Mann by Willis Eschenbach contains heartfelt and substantial Fisking of every bit of Prof Mann's piece in the Washington Post:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/11/an-open-letter-to-dr-michael-mann/
Extract:
'You are funded by the government, and are a salaried member of that scientific-technological elite that Eisenhower warned us about. Why on earth would you think that you would not have a stake in the election? The problem is the opposite – you have far too large a stake in the election, since climate science funding comes solely because the government is willing to back your ideas. As a result, a change in administrations might dry up your funding. You have a huge stake in the elections, and it is curious you want to claim otherwise. You are fighting like mad to keep the funding coming, so don’t pretend that you “shouldn’t have a stake” in the elections.
And regarding the elections, you have a huge political problem. Your science is so shabby and weak, and your claims are so apocalyptic, shrill, and far-fetched, that the people are no longer buying your line of patter. Climate change is at the very bottom of things that the electorate thinks are important … which seems to drive you guys nuts. Because of this, you and other climate scientists like Jim Hansen have become political activists, fighting like crazy to make sure the right people are elected to keep the money spigots turned wide open … just like Eisenhower warned.'
That was some post by Eshenbach, it made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.
Looking for things Mann was honest about in his bizarre op-ed piece, I think I found an example of his honesty:
He told his name correctly.
Mann is a symptom, not the disease itself. The disease is the IPCC and it's mountain of cash of compliant "scientists".