Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Portents in Paris - Josh 306 | Main | Greenery is national security threat »

Mann caught out again

Steve McIntyre reports that Michael Mann has been caught out grafting the thermometer records onto proxy data, something he claims that only happens in the fevered minds of evil-big-oil-funded-gaia-maiming deniers.



PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (24)

If Mann was a real scientist (along with Jones and co) they would be beating a track directly to McIntyres door to beg him for assistance with their work!

Because Mann and co aren't real scientists, they dont.


Jan 9, 2015 at 3:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterMailman

To call people like Mann scientists would be an abuse (or a misuse) of the English language.

Jan 9, 2015 at 4:47 PM | Registered CommenterPhillip Bratby

Wouldn't it be a lot easier, if Mann's disciples went off on an expedition, arned with scaffolding and rope, to an area with bristlecone pines. They could then erect frames around the trees, and bend them into a hockey stick shape.

Over time, the bend would become permanent, for anyone to see, without bending maths and science.

Once harvested, with careful slicing, the trunks could be cut, to form sticks, to play hockey with.

Jan 9, 2015 at 4:57 PM | Unregistered CommenterGolf Charlie

Are there any CAGW Statisticians?

Jan 9, 2015 at 4:58 PM | Unregistered CommenterSlywolfe

Ok, so Obama isn't interested in exposing this fraud. (He's part of the climate problem) So who is the next senior US politician who comes into the game from a different angle, and starts holding Mann et al to account? Policies worth $billions depend on the books being grossly cooked. It's about time Mann's goose got roasted instead.

Jan 9, 2015 at 5:22 PM | Unregistered Commentercheshirered

Slywolfe, CAGW Statistics Lesson1

2 + 2 = 7 (+/-3)

Jan 9, 2015 at 7:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterGolf Charlie

"Mann’s stump speech"

Classic. "Stumpy" should be his nickname.

Jan 9, 2015 at 7:12 PM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart

Well, if you ask any theft prevention expert (i.e, those trying to stop shoplifters), they will tell you that people can often blatantly walk out of a store with items because nobody thinks anyone could be as audacious as to do something so boldly and hope to get away with it.

Thankfully for the stores, they have video cameras.

Thankfully for the planet, we have the Bishop, Mr. Watts, Mr, McIntyre, Ms. Nova, Ms. Laframboise, et. al.

Jan 9, 2015 at 8:47 PM | Unregistered CommenterCaligulaJones

Every time terrorists butcher people, we are told that, despite their claims to be Muslim, we must not consider them to be really Muslim because Islam is a religion of peace. I think we should treat Mann the same way. Every time he butchers science, we need to remind people that even though he calls himself a scientist, he's really not one because science is a discipline devoted to honesty and the scientific method.

Jan 9, 2015 at 9:22 PM | Unregistered Commenterstan

Mann caught out again

and still the "umpires" say Not Out!

Jan 9, 2015 at 10:48 PM | Registered CommenterGreen Sand

In climate-speak, that would be "not inconsistent with safe".

Jan 9, 2015 at 11:14 PM | Unregistered CommenterEarle Williams

Are we really supposed to accept that this man is a scientist, and a professor? Yuk!

Jan 9, 2015 at 11:45 PM | Unregistered CommenterPeter Stroud

2 + 2 = 7 (+/-3)

I think post-modern science holds that equations are simply cultural constructs, and contain no absolute truth. To assign them any more power than that would be sheer bigotry, as it would discriminate between 'right' and 'wrong'.

The next logical step to take, as Naomi Klein has recently done, is to call all climate skeptics 'racists and white supremacists'.

Jan 10, 2015 at 12:00 AM | Unregistered CommenterRick Bradford

Stan 9:22pm

Oh, reading what you wrote felt like downing a cold pint on a hot day! Really good.

Eugene WR Gallun

Jan 10, 2015 at 1:40 AM | Unregistered CommenterEugene WR Gallun

Interesting use of the word 'padding' in Michael Mann's vaguely concilatory message...

Jan 10, 2015 at 12:56 PM | Unregistered Commentersherlock1

whatever the forcing, it relates to the rate-of-change of temperature, not the temperature itself. To relate the forcing to temperature requires the time-integral of the forcing. Search the 'time integral of sunspot number anomalies' to see a 95% correlation with average global temperature since before 1900.

Jan 10, 2015 at 10:57 PM | Unregistered Commenterdan pangburn

Mann himself has claimed no real climate scientist has ever done this. Far be it from me to call Mann a liar therefor...

Jan 11, 2015 at 3:05 AM | Unregistered CommenterKuhnKat

Mann is no more a scientist than a witch doctor is a doctor.

Jan 11, 2015 at 7:15 AM | Unregistered CommenterJohn Constable

That evil underhand Mann! He cunningly concealed the combination of proxy and instrumental temperatures by, erm, plotting them in different colours.

Do get a grip.

Jan 11, 2015 at 3:55 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke


This is probably too hard for you to grasp but there is no rationale for plotting the two different records as if one flows into the other. Nor does the smoothe change colour at the grafting point. And Mann did say that it is ridiculous to claim that grafting took place. Perhaps you need to wake up.

Jan 11, 2015 at 4:22 PM | Unregistered Commenterdiogenes

Ah, but they DO flow into each other, representing the same physical quantity - temperature - derived from proxy then instrumental records, with data from the different sources plotted in separate colours, changing at 1901, which according to Steve Mc, IS the changeover point.

What Mann wrote is this

No researchers in this field have ever, to our knowledge, “grafted the thermometer record onto” any reconstruction. It is somewhat disappointing to find this specious claim (which we usually find originating from industry-funded climate disinformation websites) appearing in this forum. Most proxy reconstructions end somewhere around 1980, for the reasons discussed above. Often, as in the comparisons we show on this site, the instrumental record (which extends to present) is shown along with the reconstructions, and clearly distinguished from them.

If the plot is actually intended to mislead readers into believing it is a single data series, as seems to be the implication why the colour-change? Huh?

Jan 11, 2015 at 4:40 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

So Phil it now your contention that the proxies match the instrumental record since 1901? If that is so, why was it necessary to make the change to an instrumental series? Surely the proxies would show the same result.

Jan 12, 2015 at 1:03 PM | Unregistered Commenterdiogenes


(which we usually find originating from industry-funded climate disinformation websites)
And your evidence for this interesting claim is…?

Non-existent, I would conjecture. But – hey! – never let that stop you insisting that you be taken seriously!

Jan 12, 2015 at 1:59 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

No, my contention is that Dr Mann is demonstrably innocent of the sins he is accused of on this occasion. I've no idea why he switched to instrumental data, but there are several perfectly good reasons why he might want to,

RR - those are not my words, they are from a comment at RealClimate. Check the Climate Audit pettifogging nitpick for the reference.


Jan 12, 2015 at 3:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>