From the agenda of the 2011 Geological Society of America Annual Meeting in Minneapolis (9–12 October 2011)
CLIMATE SCIENTISTS IN THE PUBLIC ARENA: WHO’S GOT OUR BACKS?
MANN, Michael E., Dept. of Meteorology and Earth and Environ. Systems Institute, Penn State University, Walker Building, University Park, PA 16827
Climate scientists have an important role to play in informing the public discourse on human-caused climate change. Our scientific expertise provides us a unique, informed perspective, and despite recent high profile attacks against climate science, the public still affords climate scientists the greatest trust to deliver an honest, unbiased assessment of the potential threats posed by climate changes. Yet, as with all areas of science where powerful special interests perceive themselves as threatened by the findings of science, scientists enter the public fray at our peril.
Our efforts to communicate the science are opposed by a well-funded, highly organized disinformation effort that aims to confuse the public about the nature of our scientific understanding.
…
Scientists are massively out-funded and outmanned in this battle, and will lose if leading scientific institutions and organizations remain on the sidelines. I will discuss this dilemma, drawing upon my own experiences in the public arena of climate change.
h/t Tom Nelson
=============================================================
I’m sorry Dr. Mann, just one look at the cash cow your buddy James Hansen gets, and what you got via the recent stimulus funding tell me your claims of being “out-funded” are pure fantasy. Even the Wall Street Journal took note:
As for stimulus jobs—whether “saved” or “created”—we thought readers might be interested to know whose employment they are sustaining. More than $2.4 million is stimulating the career of none other than Penn State climate scientist Michael Mann.
And, what happened to it being about the science, and not the money?
A few points via Jo Nova
- The US government has provided over $79 billion since 1989 on policies related to climate change, including science and technology research, foreign aid, and tax breaks.
- Despite the billions: “audits” of the science are left to unpaid volunteers. A dedicated but largely uncoordinated grassroots movement of scientists has sprung up around the globe to test the integrity of the theory and compete with a well funded highly organized climate monopoly. They have exposed major errors.
- Carbon trading worldwide reached $126 billion in 2008. Banks are calling for more carbon-trading. And experts are predicting the carbon market will reach $2 – $10 trillion making carbon the largest single commodity traded.
- Meanwhile in a distracting sideshow, Exxon-Mobil Corp is repeatedly attacked for paying a grand total of $23 million to skeptics—less than a thousandth of what the US government has put in, and less than one five-thousandth of the value of carbon trading in just the single year of 2008.
- The large expenditure in search of a connection between carbon and climate creates enormous momentum and a powerful set of vested interests. By pouring so much money into one theory, have we inadvertently created a self-fulfilling prophesy instead of an unbiased investigation?
Full report here:
Maybe need a separate page here to list all of the pro CAGW funding !!
Surely these warmest know they are lying about mankind’s contribution to the myth of global warming and its effect on the planet’s atmosphere and yet they gamble with billions of dollars and the pseudo politico scientists grab even more dollars to continue their lies and line their pockets with ill gotten gains and it has got to stop and sooner rather than later. The Gore-Mann-Hansen-Jones et al manbearpig is due for a roasting.
Oh Yes!
Stop whining, Michael Mann. You sound EXACTLY like a two-bit layperson reciting the meme in a blog post. Not very becoming I must say.
As far as I can tell, the massive, well-organized disinformation campaign consists of a few blogs and some hot air from politicians. Where is all the TV time? The best-selling books? The prize-winning documentaries? Oh, wait…
The climate alarmists must be really incompetent if they’re losing to a nearly invisible PR campaign.
I seriously wonder what color the sky is in Mann’s world… literally, what color? Here in my world, it’s blue due to H2O… what color is CO2?
Mann apparently isn’t even aware that he’s been outed and discredited, and is known to millions as a charlatan and a fraud. And it seems unlikely that he could possibly still believe the junk “science” he’s peddling.
shell & BP have been funding CRU for decades, see here yet more rubbish from mann made good, nasty
To translate from Hebrew saying:
Tears of the Aligator.
Facts are stubborn things requiring great effort to overcome. Thus, these experts (Mann and “The Team”) have job security. I don’t mean tenure, although I suspect they all do have that. I mean they are funded to produce ever more outlandish models, using undecipherable methods, questionable data, and tendentious reasoning.
Can we call them to the carpet about the claim of well-funded, highly organized disinformation campaign? Make them back that up. Show is the money. Show us the conspiracy.
Put up or shut up.
These are just inconvenient facts… nothing to see here, move along please.
“the public still affords climate scientists the greatest trust”
That public does not include the British Prime Minister David Cameron, who in his final Conference address to the Conservative Party today managed not to mention climate change in his 50 minute speech which covered almost every facet of government.
His only reference that obliquely touched the subject was “green engineering” in a long list of areas of oportunity to trade our way up from the slough of stagnation that is our economy today.
JUST TWO WORDS!
Not yet full blooded denial on his part , but methinks I heard a cockerel stirring in his sleep and perhaps clearing his throat in preparation for three loud crows in a fast approaching dawn.
How do you find the words to describe this guy’s delusions? If he’s not deluded, and he knows only too well the reality of the situation, then his cynicism and capacity for lying is so dark I don’t even want to think about it. He has run this narrative before, yet never provided any evidence to support it. What has reduced him and the Team to laughing stock status on numerous occasions is not a “well-funded, highly organized disinformation effort” of his fantasies, but the complete and utter opposite – the diligent number-crunching of unorganized bloggers whose only source of “funding” is a tip-jar.
An old Fawlty Towers quote comes to mind in which a psychiatrist says of Basil:- “there’s enough material there for an entire conference”.
Anthony, this must have come as quite a shock to you to find out how well funded you are! What do you plan on doing with your newly found funding?
[ “Mann, it’s like like a bad episode of the Matrix” ] Ha Ha Ha Ha
Dr Mann…if you tried using such logic to your wife / girl friend, when caught – she’d knock you to the floor. 🙂
Let’s see Exxon-Mobil has dished out about $100 million to the Global Climate and Energy Project at Stanford University, BP dished out about $20 to Princeton. So where does this leave the meme that the fossil fuel industry is leading a disinformation effort?
As to the skeptics are the “a well-funded, highly organized disinformtion effort”???
Well, I thought that the name of that organization was the IPCC, which is hardly a skeptically led effort.
Let’s admit that science is settled, that’s no absurdity, since it’s all cheer reviewed.
But if climate change is undisputably anthropogenic, then every penny given to climate research is wasted money.
We know it all already.
So it’s time to act!
Give the all the money to Solyndrians, or else the world gets it, ok fella?
Over the last 2 weeks I have noticed a huge increase in the pro-agw articles being listed in the Google science news section. Most but not all of these comment on the “deniers” and how horrid they are for confusing the public. The only thing I can think of is that is has to do with the political campaign or that there is a concerted effort to hype up the theory before negatives come to light with the Mann case and the EPA spanking, or maybe a combination of both. What I can say for sure is that there is only 1 article to every 20 against CAGW. Even though science may prevail one day on this subject will we ever know?
It saddens me to think that science has become a political religion yet again.
Please don’t post that picture before lunch time. Totally ruins my appetite.
Every time I read anything produced by Mann, including his legal pleadings in the UVA FOI case, I just can’t get my head round how deluded and hubristic this man is.
I think he actually believes that he is brilliant.
Go figure.
Click onto the headline and you get the GSA pre-print or whatever it is, where Mann says “These attacks are rarely fought in legitimate scientific circles such as the peer-reviewed scientific literature “. No, because Mann and the Team keep out as much as they can; shout down, rather than legitimately fight out the arguments; make editors resign; wheel up instant peer reviewed rebuttal papers. Mann’s problem is he doesn’t want to fight the attacks, he doesn’t want to prove detractors wrong, and doesn’t want to argue his case. He just wants everyone who disagrees to shut up and go away. If he had wanted to fight the attacks ….. in the peer reviewed literature, why wouldn’t he have disclosed his code and everything else, so that people could see exactly what he had done, and, perhaps, he would have had the pleasure of seeing them all eat humble pie, admitting that old Mikey was right all along. But he just didn’t do that.
The Mann lies willfully and with seeming impunity; he must feel invincible after his “exonerations”. It is one thing to wage intellectual war over obscure and dubious scientific and statistical methods. It is a completely different thing to make claims not related to science that are easily investigated, understood by the layman, and easily refuted. It is rather elementary to lay out comparative funding for the “consensus” faction side by side with funding for the skeptical faction. And yet Mann shows only offensive strategy, sort of like the Germans at the Battle of the Bulge. Throw everything you have at the enemy under heavy overcast weather conditions and in spite of a severe fuel shortage. Make rapid gains for a short time. Then their fuel runs out and the skies clear. Exposed to overwhelming Allied air supremacy. Kaput.
He knows exactly what he’s doing – don’t fool yourselves for one second that he doesn’t. Whatever one’s feelings about the man (it is my opinion that he massages the data in whatever way he sees fit to support his intended outcome… but that’s just my opinion ;), you should admire his ability to stick to the maxim, “A good defense is a strong offense”. He just keeps plugging away – sue this, complain about that, imply the other. He’s very good. Wrong, but very good.
I suspect that Mann cannot even spell ‘junk’.
That’s as in ‘science’ (for the avoidance of doubt).
Did Denial Inc. also hide the missing heat?
Mann’s statement is beyond parody.
Joseph would be proud.