Nobel cause corruption?

UPDATE: uh oh

The National Review decided to offer congratulations to Dr. Mann, they write:

Honoring Michael Mann’s Nobel Prize

To mark Michael Mann’s Nobel Prize, we bought this full-page ad that ran in today’s Penn State student newspaper.

Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review.

h/t to WUWT reader Frank K

UPDATE: Proof that it actually ran, here

h/t to Brian Lemon

About these ads

234 thoughts on “Nobel cause corruption?

  1. It is fitting that this partial share of a Nobel prize came under the Politicking category, and not as Science.

  2. Hate it when the mod snips stuff and calls it funny—-mod just snip it don’t tell me it’s funny.

  3. http://comerecommended.com/blog/2012/05/31/leaders-undone-by-resume-fraud/

    Leaders Undone By Resume Fraud

    Scott Thompson – After spending only a few months as CEO of Yahoo!, Thompson was fired when an activist investor revealed he did not actually hold a degree in computer science from StoneHill College, as his credentials had said. His degree was actually in business.

    Ronald Zarrella – In 2002, the CEO of Bausch & Lomb offered to resign after it was revealed he did not actually have a master’s degree in business administration from New York University, which he had listed on his resume for a decade. His $1.1 million bonus was revoked.

    Ken Lonchar – The executive vice president and chief financial officer of Veritas software–now Symantec–resigned after reports that he embellished his resume with a fake MBA from Standford University.

    Joe Biden – Now the vice president of the United States, Biden dropped out of the 1988 president race after it was found he had plagiarized during his time as a law student, made false claims about his academic history, and plagiarized a speech.

    Marille Jones – Jones resigned as dean of admissions at Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2007, after admitting she had lied about her academic degrees on her application to work there 28 years before.

  4. This is brutal. What extremists like Mann cannot deal with, is being the laughing stock of the Nation.

  5. Outstandingly embarrassing !
    With all that rain, there must be a fresh sinkhole nearby he can crawl into.

  6. Claiming a Nobel Prize where none has been given is fraud. Not a laughing matter. It lends credence to the charge of fraud often spoken by many skeptics and ridiculed as being paranoid by AGWers.

  7. I would have preferred to have had the previous sticky about Mann’s suit still at the top. The comments may have been getting unwieldy but there was still some good conversation going on. Sadly that all ends in a day as soon as the post drops from the front.

    Ah well, my only comment about this article is: The headline is genius!

  8. Haha – given how over the top the advert is these snipped comments must be really really over the top.

  9. An attempt by Mann to intimidate Steyn and National Review seems to be falling just a tad below Mickey’s expectations!
    To buy ad space in the Penn State newspaper – brilliant!
    Steyn’s cojones are impressive!

  10. MegaloMann will probably have the editor of the student newspaper fired for carrying this. He or she will then join a very distinguished cohort…

    No sense of humour, some people.

  11. Ayup. As expected, NRO is enjoying this lawsuit. Well played.

    Poor Mike. I can picture him sitting there staring at that ad… “But… but… my lawyer said they’d be intimidated by the lawsuit.”

  12. i believe that we can file this under Rule 5

    “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating.

    good job nro

  13. Looks like Judith got it right, this is going to end in tears Mikey.

    Reputation? What reputation?

    LOL

  14. As a leading scholar of Mannic behavior, I predict that Mann will resist attempts by his lawyers to amend the complaint. He will insist that he has in fact won the Nobel Prize, and will call the Nobel Committee’s statement to the contrary “bizarre” and “disingenuous”. This will put the lawyers in the real bind (its amazing to me that they didn’t check this basic fact before filing their compliant with the court). In the end, if Mann refuses to allow the lawyers to amend the complaint, the lawyers will have no other options but to withdraw as counsel to Mann.

    On a related note, I’m surprised that he student newspaper ran the add. I imagine Mann is working to have the editor removed as we speak.

  15. Me thinks that Mann is a denier… he denied reality when stating that he’s a Nobel laureate. One has to think that there are some at Penn State that believe that Mann is a distraction at best and an idiot at worst. As for me… I’m leaning towards the conclusion that he’s an idiot.

    Megakudos to those running the student newspaper at Penn State! They had the guts to do what the administration of that school couldn’t… or wouldn’t.

  16. Pamela Gray says:
    October 31, 2012 at 6:04 pm
    Claiming a Nobel Prize where none has been given is fraud. Not a laughing matter.
    ======================
    Fair comment but its highly unlikely there will be any successful official inquiry (yet another whitewash – yawn) into Mann several false claims that he received the Nobel Peace Prize. So at least skeptics can have some fun along the way and denting Mann’s huge ego is really good fun.

  17. Re Rigoberta Menchú: While their is some doubt about elements of her story, it seems generally accepted that she was deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize. (other than David Horowitz attempting to label her as a “Marxist terrorist).

    Rather a pity they had to use the comparison. Unnecessary.

  18. I like the way they point out how utterly farcical the Peace Prize is anyway. Especially the Rigoberta Menchu bit.

  19. The lawyer’s firm who filed this case must feel like fools too, to have taken on such a public case and fallen before they reached the first fence must be very damaging to their reputation. I wonder how much per hour they charge for such ineptitude

  20. You should have added “Faux-cahontas” (Elizabeth Warren – running against Scott Brown in the Massachusetts Senatorial contest who apparently got into Harvard pretending to be a Native American, whose grandfather was guilty of actually shooting a Native American, and to which heritage she has produced no evidence) to the list of prevaricators. She contributed 5 recipes to a book titled, “Pow Wow Chow” , claiming Cherokee origin for these, in which 2 or 3 of the recipes were found to be plagiarized from a French Cookbook.

    “The two recipes, “Cold Omelets with Crab Meat” and “Crab with Tomato Mayonnaise Dressing,” appear in an article titled “Cold Omelets with Crab Meat,” written by Pierre Franey of the New York Times News Service that was published in the August 22, 1979 edition of the Virgin Islands Daily News.”

    Like Joe Biden, she may still win that office next Tuesday.

  21. Typicall … The Nobel Peace Prize is not a Nobel Prize! From being something serious, it has evolved into a political tool.

    Unlike the real Nobel Prize Committees, which consists of professionally skilled people, the Nobel Peace Prize Committee consists of politically reliable persons appointed by the Norwegian Government, Stortinget. So, the choice of the Peace Prize winner depends on polilitical winds in Norway … (There’s no coincidence that the selection of controversial winners …)

  22. The Mann effect would appear to be the greater curse on comparison with the Streisand effect. It is true that one should never quarrel with those who buy ink by the barrel.

  23. Wow….Rich Lowry… that even made me uncomfortable!

    What a pathetic sham Mann is.

    A sham and an object of ridicule.

    How low can you go to say that you are a nobel prize winner. What a grandiose louse.

    Most Nobel Laureates are reluctant publicly.

    Mann is making himself a meaning beyond his name…. a self-inflated delusional mega-maniacle liar.

    100 years from now, to be called a “mann” will be banned as hate speech.

  24. In situations like this, I cannot help but think of the famous “Voltaire’s prayer.” Voltaire once wrote,

    I have always made one prayer to God, that is very short. Here it is: “My God, make our enemies quite ridiculous!” God granted it to me.
    (J’ai toujours fait une prière à Dieu, qui est fort courte. La voici: Mon Dieu, rendez nos ennemis bien ridicules! Dieu m’a exaucé.)

    It looks like Voltaire’s Prayer is being granted to Mark Steyn as well.

  25. Oh my, ya would never know its Halloween :-)

    Kinda like a scary commercial.

    Do not click this link……!

  26. Beautiful. Well played NR and kudos to the newspaper for running it! The Mann is an embarrassment to science. The tide is definitely turning.

  27. markx says:
    October 31, 2012 at 6:51 pm

    Re Rigoberta Menchú: While their is some doubt about elements of her story, it seems generally accepted that she was deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize. (other than David Horowitz attempting to label her as a “Marxist terrorist). Rather a pity they had to use the comparison. Unnecessary.

    “Some doubt”?? Even the New York Times said that Rigoberta Menchu “fabricated,” “seriously exaggerated,” and told “one lie after another” in her testimonial. However, the Nobel Prize Committee let her keep the award because of the good it did by exposing the brutal Guatemalan Army. In other words, they applied the “fake but true” defense that Dan Rather used 10 years later when he was caught releasing forged documents about Pres. Bush’s National Guard service. In the end, I expect Prof. Mann will rely on the same defense.

  28. In the aftermath to come for Pennsylvania State University … unfortunately … they as in the Administration can still disown Michael E. Mann and all of the suffering that he has bestowed upon the Pennsylvania State University and the good peoples of Pennsylvania.

    Such will take courage.

    Does the Administration of the Pennsylvania State University have COURAGE?

    Ball’s is in your court Penn State … What’cha gona do withit?

    8D

  29. Brian Lemon, thanks for posting the digital hard copy. I looked at the online version, but no ads there. Love actually seeing it in print.

  30. Good but they used the wrong pic: Mann took a more solemn pose too expressly for promoting himself as the stoic pragmatist – as we’d expect a Nobel Laureate to be.

    Side by side here, http://i.imgur.com/YbFUV.jpg

    This pic is the upbeat one for party invitations and dating sites.

  31. October 31, 2012 at 5:54 pm | ferd berple says:
    ———————————

    That would make an excellent followup add for NRO … well NRO ? ;)

  32. Wow–a full page, no less.

    Positioned right after the “Complaints” paragraph on the previous page, and right before the “Free-falling” sports page after it. Coincidence? Maybe.

  33. Maybe Mann should have heeded that advice given early last century by H. L. Mencken:

    Never get into an argument with a man who buys his ink by the barrel.

    .
    .
    * Variously credited to Franklin Delano Roosevelt on an occasion as President he was in an argument with publisher William Randolph Hearst, also Benjamin Franklin, and William I. Greener as “Greener’s Law”.

    Notably, H. L. Mencken is also known for this quote:

    A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant and the crazy crazier.

    (CT’s take note; I think he had you in mind on this one …)

    .

  34. The PSU Collegian is still running with this under “admin news”

    “(…)Mann, a meteorology professor at Penn State, has been recognized nationally for his research on global warming and is one of the first scientists to discover rising surface temperatures in the 20th century. This discovery is known as the “Hockey Stick Graph.”

    In 2007, Mann was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for his research.

    According to court documents, Simberg and Steyn called Mann’s work a “hoax” and argued that he fabricated his data for the results in two separate publications.

    Mann’s work was called under review in 2009 when more than 350 emails relating to Mann’s research were illegally retrieved, thus starting a university investigation.

    In 2010, Mann was cleared by the university of illegally conducting research after a five-month investigation”

  35. Mark Smith says October 31, 2012 at 8:29 pm

    Awarding the peace prize to the IPCC was illegal too- the terms of Nobel’s will clearly state the person who…..
    Not organisation; person.

    Which???? The ‘Peace’ prize or one of the ‘prizes’ as for Economics, Physics, etc.

    People confuse the two ‘types’ of prizes ALL the time … the two types are not even awarded by the same organization in the same country!

    .

  36. _Jim says:
    October 31, 2012 at 9:13 pm

    Mark Smith says October 31, 2012 at 8:29 pm

    Awarding the peace prize to the IPCC was illegal too- the terms of Nobel’s will clearly state the person who…..
    Not organisation; person.

    Which???? The ‘Peace’ prize or one of the ‘prizes’ as for Economics, Physics, etc.

    People confuse the two ‘types’ of prizes ALL the time … the two types are not even awarded by the same organization in the same country!

    There are five (5) Nobel prizes and each is supposed to be awarded to a *person* according to Nobel’s will, a link to which I posted earlier.

  37. “… on this side I give you ‘Yamal Mann and the Briffa Band Experience’. Flipsides, it’s that crazy be-bop sound from those defunct dudes on the block, the ‘Tiljander Series’. [edited cuts]

  38. _Jim says:

    October 31, 2012 at 9:09 pm

    Maybe Mann should have heeded that advice given early last century by H. L. Mencken:

    “Never get into an argument with a man who buys his ink by the barrel.”
    =================
    Is it not bandwidth now ?
    As we speak.

  39. Thanks Jim for the info. Following your tip I checked it out, you are right. the Peace Prize is more of a reflection of Norway political sentiment than true accomplishments. The other prizes are awarded in Sweden based on verifiable accomplishments.

  40. The NRO missed the chance to land a killing blow. It failed to mention that the Nobel committee, or the IPCC, had (according to a WUWT commenter on a recent Mann / Nobel thread) sent an e-mail a year ago to the 2000 recipients of the IPCC’s commendation telling them not to claim to be partial recipients of a Nobel prize. If he ignored that direction, it makes him look five times worse. Otherwise, his sin is venial.

  41. “National Review decided to offer congratulations to Dr. Mann”

    Sure it is Halloween?
    Because it sure seems like Christmas!

  42. Well at least Mann might get to sell a few more copies of his book as a result of the publicity.

    It’s more difficult for me to see how the climate-change business of Mann’s lawyers will draw any benefit from the whole affair. I thought they were taught to only sue the people who had the money.

  43. To save on energy and the planet, the top of Mike’s head can now be used to cook popcorn.

    Seriously (sarc on), he shouldn’t be assumed of committing intentional fraud. After all, he is only a highly educated DR and PhD, trained and experienced in the disciplines of logic and such, with practice in carefully choosing his words in only 150 scientific publications. (sarc kept on)

  44. Pamela Gray says:
    October 31, 2012 at 6:04 pm

    “Claiming a Nobel Prize where none has been given is fraud. Not a laughing matter. It lends credence to the charge of fraud often spoken by many skeptics and ridiculed as being paranoid by AGWers.”

    Exactly. Dangling immunity from even criticism has been the undoing of many a fraud.

    So has the the mistake of finally launching that fatal lawsuit that sends someone slapping them back to the showers to act antisocial and sullen, and angry people discovered the world isn’t going to end, and that they’re a criminal, nothing more, after all.

  45. Great work, NRO … I particularly liked:

    Although Dr. Mann claims he won the prize in a filing with the District of Columbia Superior Court, the Nobel committee says he didn’t. But isn’t it fun to pretend?

    And now I can’t get a certain tune out of my head! If Mann were ever to be honest with himself, this oldie-but-goodie from The Platters would be his theme song:

  46. re: SasjaL @ October 31, 2012 at 7:27 pm

    Stortinget is the Norwegian parliament, not the government. Otherwise you are correct that the Nobel committee members are politically appointed. It is a parking spot for useless former politicians.

  47. GlynnMhor says:
    October 31, 2012 at 6:08 pm
    “Apparently the last-mentioned Rigoberta Menchu was accused of stretching the truth a bit in her dictated autobiography “… to meet the publicity needs of the guerrilla movement…””

    Well, all the Nobel Peace Price laureates do that, don’t they – “composite girlfriend”, “Mike’s Nature Trick to hide the decline”…

  48. Saw an interview with Mann on Al Jazeera (of all places). He was all full of the ~’if we don’t get something done it’s the end of the world as we know it’ kind of stuff. VERY committed to the whole end of the world baked in the cake notion and dripping green… (A lot of that on Halloween ;-)

    http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/10/20121021181018376635.html

    Don’t know why an Arab news outlet is so committed to the US going “green” and all, but who knows. They also ‘lean very left’ which seems odd for a culture dominated by religion and political strong men… Oh Well.

    But at least we know that Mann can still get bookings… even if out of the country…

  49. Mike A says: October 31, 2012 at 9:23 pm
    Awarding the peace prize to the IPCC was illegal too- the terms of Nobel’s will clearly state the person who…..
    Not organisation; person.
    ————————————–
    No, the will does not explicitly state “person”. The normal interpretation of the wording (in Swedish: “…och en del åt den, som har verkat mest eller bäst för folkens förbrödrande och afskaffande eller minskning af stående arméer samt bildande och spridande af fredskongresser.”) is for a person but may well be taken to mean group of persons (as seen with the prizes in economics, physics, medicine) and thus, organizations.

    The inapproriateness of awarding to the IPCC has rather to do with the explicit statements that they should have done the best or most work for uniting the brotherhood of man, abolishing or reducing standing armies and/or organizing and spreading of peace congresses.

  50. It is time to give the Mann a break. From a October 12, 2007, post on a respected US government web site (and found via 10-28-12 post on Mann’s facebook page)

    The Chairman of the IPCC, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, sent a letter to the lead authors of this year’s reports, remarking, “I have been stunned in a pleasant way with the news of the award of the Nobel Peace Prize for the IPCC. This makes each of you a Nobel Laureate and …

    Don’t get me wrong, I think this reflects on the ability of the IPCC leaders to understand the facts and perhaps their willingness to misunderstand them when it helps the cause. But, perhaps there is a bit too much piling on.

  51. Ouch!
    I’m wondering, where are his friends and colleagues in his time of need?
    Surely someone can pop up out of the woodwork and claim Dr Mann had forgotten to take his meds that day?

  52. “what the European Union is to the Europian Union is Michael Mann to Penn State”

    Sice I’m from the EU and don’t know anyone here, who thinks the EU deserved this price, I like this epic phrase most…..

  53. It seems lately that Nobel Prizes (all kinds) have been awarded simply for the sake of it, almost as if a minimum number must be awarded annually.

    Lemme see, why not award one to the moron that invented “gangnam style”, whatever that is and why it’s so necessarily trendy right now?

    In Mann’s case, if there were a Nobel Prize for receipt of negative nouns, I think “scoundrel” would top the list of “nice” and degenerate from there.

  54. I bet he did not even use those logs he is posing with to elaborate the infamous hockey stick graph.

  55. “@markx – Re Rigoberta Menchú: While their is some doubt about elements of her story, it seems generally accepted that she was deserving of a Nobel Peace Prize….”

    I really didn’t have any time or inclination to research this statement in depth, but I noticed that there was a Wiki reference given. It reads just like the usual biased wiki entries for AGW. Some comments are made about her making incorrect statements in order to paint her political opposition black, and immediately these statements are justified as being ‘ok in the circumstances’.

    You can usually tell when a wiki entry is written by a ‘true believer’. This one obviously is. So, if your justification for saying ‘it seems generally accepted that she was deserving…’ is based on the wiki entry, I would say that was a very weak basis to make that assertion… .

  56. Rats! Looks like my joke disappeared.

    Did anyone notice the climate cartoon, several pages before the NRO ad?

  57. Mann is a fraud. But it is wrong to link such an imposter to Rigoberta Manchu. She is a very brave woman who is a worthy Nobel Prize winner. Henry Kissinger is an appropriate comparator for Mann.

  58. As Michael Mann has no problem casting aspersion on Steven McIntyre, this is poetic justice. he should think before accusing other people of the same behaviour that he indulges in himself. Then again, he sets his own standards, does he not !
    Well done NR, giving him a taste of his own medicine is classic.

  59. _Jim says:
    October 31, 2012 at 9:13 pm
    …….
    “Which???? The ‘Peace’ prize or one of the ‘prizes’ as for Economics, Physics, etc.

    People confuse the two ‘types’ of prizes ALL the time … the two types are not even awarded by the same organization in the same country!”

    People confuse the “prize in Economics in the memory of Alfred Nobel” awarded by the national bank of Sweden.
    The genuine Nobel Committee still regrets that they let that happen.

  60. Carsten Arnholm, Norway says:
    November 1, 2012 at 12:26 am
    “Stortinget is the Norwegian parliament, not the government. Otherwise you are correct that the Nobel committee members are politically appointed. It is a parking spot for useless former politicians.”

    Carsten, what influence does the evil which of the North, Gro Harlem Brundtland, have on these?

  61. This wonderful joke makes me wonder if this is the way to tackle “climate science”. Take iCAGW absolutely seriously – take all the most extreme predictions (particularly those from 10 years back!) and create a spoof apocalyptic article. Once you get people laughing, the job is done!

  62. Oh you bunch of Wisenheimers just laugh it up. You won’t be laughing so hard after Mike unleashes the fury with the most DEVASTATING Tweet response EVAH! You just wait…total epicness is coming for you. Get ready to feel the pain. Oooooooh, Mike is so going to go Twitter-nuke on you.

  63. Brilliant. Thought might be given to running this again in the alumni magazine or other media of even wider circulation, but this is enough to sting Mann, embarrass him on his home turf, and force him and his lawyers onto the defensive “but I can explain this” mode. I agree that it may also force his lawyers to amend the complaint to avoid misleading the court about a material allegation of fact. It’s puzzling to me that they didn’t check the facts they allege. I don’t know that the court will deeply care about the amendment (people amend complaints all the time) but it might pique the court’s curiosity and it will definitely weaken Mann’s argument. And the longer the delay before amending, the worse the whole thing looks.
    Finally, and not trivially, this costs the plaintiff energy, confidence and money. How many billable hours are being spent trying to sort through this sideshow, under pressure and probably with growing friction between counselor and client?

  64. Otter says:
    November 1, 2012 at 2:10 am
    Rats! Looks like my joke disappeared.

    Did anyone notice the climate cartoon, several pages before the NRO ad?

    The Frankenstrom (spell?) and his bride? Yes, I notice.

  65. Mark Smith said: Awarding the peace prize to the IPCC was illegal too – the terms of Nobel’s will clearly state “the person who…..” Not organisation; person.

    Steady on: this is a matter of legal construction (interpretation) of Alfred Nobel’s 1895 Will under Norwegian and/or Swiss law, as to whether “person” includes “organisation” (or in UK/US parlance, “corporation”).

    Nobel died in 1896. The 1904 Peace prize was awarded to the “Institute of International Law”, an organisation. One would have thought that if the executors exceeded their legal powers in 1904 this would have been challenged well before now – and this pedigree almost certainly means that it is just too late to challenge it now.

    As one other example it is commonplace under UK law that, as a matter of interpretation “person includes a body of persons, corporate or unincorporate”, in private documents and in interpreting statute. See for example the UK Interpretation Act 1978 (general interpretation of statute) at the following link:

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1978/30

    I think goes without question that the 2007 Peace price was validly awarded to the IPCC and Al Gore jointly – and it was certainly not awarded to Michael Mann.

  66. Love it! It draws full attention to the kind of Mann he is, derides him and punctures his massive ego in one page! And Mann was worried about the damage done to his reputation by Steyn’s original article! Perhaps Mann should have been more careful what he said subsequent to filing suit – he is now more undone by what he himself has said since filing suit than anything that was ever said before. After all, before filing suit his case that he was not responsible for “torturing the facts” was at least arguable. Now he looks like a serial offender……

    I’m just wondering what kind of reaction Steyn is hoping to provoke from Mann. If Mann reacts true to form he’s bound to dig himself deeper in somehow.

  67. Nicholas Harding says:
    October 31, 2012 at 5:52 pm

    Hate it when the mod snips stuff and calls it funny—-mod just snip it don’t tell me it’s funny.

    Now that’s funny!

  68. cui bono says:
    October 31, 2012 at 6:13 pm
    MegaloMann will probably have the editor of the student newspaper fired for carrying this.

    Don’t you know? “The Buck stops with YOU!” according to our current POTUS. Some lower level advertising manager will be canned. The Editor can’t be responsible for ALL of the content of the publication. But I’d like to be a fly on the wall when MM comes a calling. OUCH!

    If he e-mails either the University President or the editor on this matter with his Penn State account, would those e-mails be FOIA available?

    National Review – Well played :-)

  69. Limerick corner:

    The Mann with the Nobel surprise
    Has his fingers in too many pies
    He’s now setup to fall
    In his case v Tim Ball
    When discovery brings out the lies

    The ever derisive Mark Steyn
    Hooks Mann on the end of his line
    His Nobel Surprise
    Is covered in more flies
    Than you’ll find on a bristlecone pine

  70. I looked up the bio of Rigoberta Menchu and am very disapointed that she is compared to MM.
    MM has not suffered for his science.

  71. History will rank the true value of Mann’s work; Penn State will eventually rank them alongside Jerry Sandusky’s contributions to their sports program.

  72. A full page ad was a bit much. Should have been a quarter panel ad on the same page with the Penn State child sex abuse article (as posted from the electronic version of the paper).

  73. Evidently anthropogenic CO2 emissions and global warming also cause relativistic time dilation: my calendar now shows April 1st!

  74. What better way to take a dig at Mann (Boyy?) than by supporting my Alma Mater’s paper. Well played, NRO.

  75. 21 Oct: NYT: Nicholas D. Kristof: Will Climate Get Some Respect Now?
    President Obama and Mitt Romney seemed determined not to discuss climate change in this campaign. So thanks to Hurricane Sandy for forcing the issue: Isn’t it time to talk not only about weather, but also about climate?
    It’s true, of course, that no single storm or drought can be attributed to climate change…
    But many scientists believe that rising carbon emissions could make extreme weather — like Sandy — more likely…
    I was schooled in the far-reaching changes under way several years ago by Eskimos in Alaska, who told me of their amazement at seeing changes in their Arctic village — from melting permafrost to robins (for which their Inupiat language has no word), and even a (shivering) porcupine. If we can’t see that something extraordinary is going on in the world around us, we’re in trouble…
    Politicians have dropped the ball, but so have those of us in the news business. The number of articles about climate change fell by 41 percent from 2009 to 2011, according to DailyClimate.org…
    Democrats have been AWOL on climate change, but Republicans have been even more recalcitrant. Their failure is odd, because in other areas of national security Republicans pride themselves on their vigilance. Romney doesn’t want to wait until he sees an Iranian nuclear weapon before acting, so why the passivity about climate change?
    Along with eight million others, the Kristofs have lost power, so I’ve been sending Twitter messages on my iPhone by candlelight — an odd juxtaposition that feels like a wake-up call. In the candlelit aftermath of a future hurricane, I’m guessing, we’ll look back at the silence about climate in the 2012 election and ask: “What were they thinking?”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/kristof-will-climate-get-some-respect-now.html?_r=0

    kristof…a fully-fledged member of the tweetering class! what is he thinking?

  76. His lawyer should be concerned about the Rule 11 sanctions that may come down on his head for filing a frivolous law suit and false information with the court. Once you take out the Nobel stuff, the suit loses a lot of its punch.

  77. Man, the snipper is out in force today. Did we get it tuned up last week or somenthing?

    [snip . . hahaha . . mod, but no , no tune up or somenthing (sic)]

  78. The NRO ad places a good deal of pressure on Penn State, too.
    Mann was previously the subject of yet another investigation at Penn State where no wrongdoing was found.
    The wounded, but loyal Penn State alumni and student body might have something to say about this business… “the cure” involves no half measures.

    http://live.psu.edu/pdf/Final_Investigation_Report.pdf

  79. Robert Clemenzi said: ”It is time to give the Mann a break. The Chairman of the IPCC, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, sent a letter to the lead authors of this year’s reports remarking, “I have been stunned in a pleasant way with the news of the award of the Nobel Peace Prize for the IPCC. This makes each of you a Nobel Laureate …””

    Not with you, I’m afraid. Lead authors didn’t receive a prize in person at a Nobel awards ceremony. Before vaunting the “Nobel Laureate” claim in personal CVs and legal pleadings, it was just part of normal scientific method (testing hypotheses for truth or falsity) for them to ask themselves whether they were actually entitled – for example by a quick email to the Norwegian Nobel Institute (address readily available on www).

    But that is not Dr Mann’s self-aggrandising way. He chose to assume the hypothesis was true without enquiry; now it is falsified he must bear the associated obloquy.

  80. This ranks right up there with the symbolic Doolittle raid on Tokyo and the reply to the Germans at Bastogne in the Battle of the Bulge. In both cases the symbolism was important to keep up moral and determination in the fight against seemingly overwhelming oppression and foregone conclusion. The truth will persevere and so will science in the long run but I’m not so sure about the money waste in the backdrop of a declining country economy in the short and medium term. That is the true cost of ignorance, group think, and campus rag sheet excuses for journalism.

  81. I don’t think his over-inflated ego can take much more of this. Something’s gotta give.
    Ready the cattle prods and strait-jacket.

  82. Richard111 says:

    November 1, 2012 at 5:10 am

    I looked up the bio of Rigoberta Menchu and am very disapointed that she is compared to MM.
    MM has not suffered for his science.
    =======================================================
    So, suffering is his objective here. He’s been parading about with a styrofoam cross on his back for a while now. Sympathy prevented. (And you don’t get a certificate of participation from the IPCC without getting the distinction between the actual prize and the certificate – even if you’re going to claim to be as dumb as a hockey stick. He knowingly tortured that data to get the result he wanted.)

  83. What Michael Gorbachev is to the USSR – destroyed the USSR.
    What the EU is to Europe – is destroying Europe.

    Is the message that Mann will destroy Penn state?

    And among the lumineries, why did they omit to mention Yassar Arafat? Cherrying picking again?

  84. John Silver says:
    November 1, 2012 at 2:34 am

    Carsten Arnholm, Norway says:
    November 1, 2012 at 12:26 am
    “Stortinget is the Norwegian parliament, not the government. Otherwise you are correct that the Nobel committee members are politically appointed. It is a parking spot for useless former politicians.”

    Carsten, what influence does the evil which of the North, Gro Harlem Brundtland, have on these?

    That characterization is yours (although counterarguments are difficult to find). 2 of 5 committee members are from her party, including the committee leader and former prime minister Thorbjørn Jagland. Jagland was prime minister 1996-1997 after being appointed by and following Gro Harlem Brundtland. He made a complete fool of himself in 1997 when he resigned the government after winning the election. He is known since then as Thorbjørn “36.9” Jagland, because he said he would resign if his party did not get the same number of votes as in the previous election, although no such rule exists. He didn’t get that many votes, but remained the biggest party. Because of his foolish statements, he had to resign. He has not improved since.

    The other members come from other parties to the left and right. However, in my opinion it does not matter, these people are like puppets. In Norway, all the parties are committed to CAGW, and apparently also Mrs. Brundtland’s Agenda21. There really is no alternative available.

  85. E.M.Smith says:
    November 1, 2012 at 12:27 am
    “Don’t know why an Arab news outlet is so committed to the US going “green” and all, but who knows. ”

    When the US administration kills coal, that’s perfect for Qatar (funders of Al Jazeera and lately Hamas).

    “They also ‘lean very left’ which seems odd for a culture dominated by religion and political strong men… Oh Well. ”

    A weak US president is right up their street.

  86. Coach Springer says:
    November 1, 2012 at 7:47 am
    “He knowingly tortured that data to get the result he wanted.”

    There is no evidence for the assumption that Mann knew what he was doing.

  87. Let’s see, at Penn State we saw a corrupt administration unable to properly investigate, while in the UK police would hesitate to seek helpful information from the public because such a request could have interfered with govt messaging about climate at Copenhagen…..

    Then there are various farcical climate related “inquiries” in both UK and USA which are careful not to even investigate many relevant issues…… and now we have this dramatic news affecting Michael Mann’s own university and state:

    BREAKING: Penn State University’s former President to be charged with perjury and obstruction of justice!!

    The issue for understanding CRU/UEA, Mann, climate science, and so called “inquiries” is not the cover-ups of the Sandusky case per se but what can be understood about the leadership and administration of relevant universities and departments in recent years (not to mention other scientific and professional bodies, etc.). If ex-Pres. Spanier of Penn State would behave this way over the Sandusky case, how can anyone be confident he (and similar colleagues) were better in relation to inquiries pertaining to climate science, Michael Mann and Phil Jones, CRU and UEA, etc.

  88. Roger Knights says:
    October 31, 2012 at 10:16 pm

    The NRO missed the chance to land a killing blow. It failed to mention that the Nobel committee, or the IPCC, had (according to a WUWT commenter on a recent Mann / Nobel thread) sent an e-mail a year ago to the 2000 recipients of the IPCC’s commendation telling them not to claim to be partial recipients of a Nobel prize. If he ignored that direction, it makes him look five times worse. Otherwise, his sin is venial.

    Does anyone have a copy of that email? Mann’s Lawyers have a bit of a problem on their hands. Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (DC’s Superior Court’s rule 11 is identical to the Federal Rule 11) sates:


    (b) Representations to the Court. By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper—whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it—an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:

    (3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery;
    ..

    So on the surface it would seem that Cozen O’Connor failed to undertake reasonable inquiry prior to filing (what would seem to be) a false claim with the court (I find it impossible to believe that Cozen would knowingly file a false claim with the court). If Mann had received an email from the Nobel Committee advising him that he is not a Nobel Prize winner and failed to tell his lawyers this — well then I suspect his lawyers have just learned a object lesson about the nature of their client.

    If, on the other hand, Mann believed he was a Nobel Prize winner and there’s no record of anyone telling him otherwise, then the failure lies solely with Cozen’s lack of due diligence.

    .

  89. DirkH says:
    November 1, 2012 at 8:43 am
    Coach Springer says:
    November 1, 2012 at 7:47 am
    “He knowingly tortured that data to get the result he wanted.”

    There is no evidence for the assumption that Mann knew what he was doing.
    =====================================================================
    8-)

  90. Will PSU Prof Michael Mann now threaten to sue the PSU student newspaper for publishing a NRO ad that mocks Mann’s Nobel Prize delusions?

    Hint to Scott Mandia, your buddy Mikey may need some more of your legal slush fund money. Scott, you know the fund you manage which appears to exist for the purpose of defending the Climategate cadre of researchers with questionably ethical standards; whose research is disturbingly all funded by the public; who appear to have helped to intentionally bias / manipulate (see CG released info) the AR3 and the AR4.

    Scott, shouldn’t you change the name of your legal defense fund to something like ‘legal offense
    and defense’ fund? : )

    John

  91. Does anyone know when Jerry Sandusky will be filing HIS suit against the NRO for comparing him to Michael Mann?

  92. Gunga Din says:
    October 31, 2012 at 5:55 pm
    [snip - over the top, and not funny -mod]
    =========================================================
    OK.
    How about Josh doing a cartoon of Mann’s ego, reputation and/or integrity bound by his own Nobel Lariat?

  93. I’ve given some thought to why Penn State’s newspaper printed NRO’s ad. I came up with three possibilities.

    (1) The editor didn’t read the fine print at the bottom of the ad.
    (2) The newspaper decided that academic freedom trumps vested interest and printed the ad while holding its collective nose.
    (3) Taking a lesson from the Penn State leadership, the newspaper decided that money trumps principle and the revenue from a full-page ad was just too much to forego.

    What say you?

  94. hro001 says:
    November 1, 2012 at 12:11 am
    “And now I can’t get a certain tune out of my head! ”

    From the minute I read this last night, I couldn’t get this word out of my head – Stickittothemanneosis

  95. Gunga Din says:
    November 1, 2012 at 9:18 am
    ================================================
    Maybe “tripped up” instead of “bound”?

  96. Somehow I get the feeling that Mikey has taken one of these pages from the paper, whited out the asterisk, cut off the bottom paragraph, and pinned it up to his office door. Denial ain’t just a river….

  97. Related: PA Attorney General preparing to indict former Penn State president Graham Spanier on perjury and obstruction of justice charges for lying to a Grand Jury on the Sandusky case. Link follows:

    http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/01/14852918-former-penn-state-president-graham-spanier-faces-charges-tied-to-child-sex-abuse-scandal?lite

    Spanier was president of Penn State in 2010 when Mann was cleared. This indictment tends to make NRO’s / Steyn’s / Simberg’s case for them. Cheers –

    http://www.research.psu.edu/news/2010/michael-mann-decision

  98. While right and truth are on Steyn’s side, this doesn’t necessarily end well for him. Right and truth are not factors that enter into the equation of justice where progressive liberal judges are concerned.

  99. the prooblem is the answer to the question of “Who is going to laugh last?”
    I despise Mann, and I appreciate that he is a target of ease and fun. But the lawsuit is for real, and the legal process is closer to the beginning than the end. However, this good fun does not mean much if Mann ends up laughing last. And the pervasive nature of AGW, infecting more and more of society I would not be so sanguine about this.

  100. I think Penn State Alumni should now start to put pressure on University President Erickson to re-open the Mann investigation. Mann’s honesty is being called into question because of the Nobel Prize claim at the same time that the former university president (the very same President who oversaw PSU’s investigation of Mann) is being indicted for obstruction of justice. This has the potential to be a perfect PR storm for the University.

    Serious questions persist about potential misstatements of fact in the Penn State Investigation of Mann. And, NRO will certainly put PSU’s investigation of Mann on public trial during the defamation suit. Penn State can not afford another scandal. How well will their investigation of Mann stand up to real scrutiny? Erickson must take action to get in front of this and to assure himself that the Mann investigation was conducted properly and was not another Spanier Special. The only way to do that this to re-open the investigation and to appoint a dis-interested, independent investigator

  101. A current science news headline is most apt for Mann and Penn State. It reads “Causation Warps our Perception of Time.” Unfortunately, Mann attempted to warp time itself through the data manipulation trick in addition to our perception of it. That puts him in the class of illusionists alongside Houdini and many copycats that followed. Shall we try to handcuff trick next?

  102. Reed Coray on November 1, 2012 at 9:25 am

    I’ve given some thought to why Penn State’s newspaper printed NRO’s ad. I came up with three possibilities.

    (1) The editor didn’t read the fine print at the bottom of the ad.
    (2) The newspaper decided that academic freedom trumps vested interest and printed the ad while holding its collective nose.
    (3) Taking a lesson from the Penn State leadership, the newspaper decided that money trumps principle and the revenue from a full-page ad was just too much to forego.

    What say you?

    – – – – –

    Reed Coray,

    I will add other possibilities:

    4) The PSU student newspaper’s student staff are future journalists who know where there is smoke there is fire. The PSU Prof Mann is smokey, if nothing else.

    5) There may be things that the student body knows ‘off the record’ about the quality of faculty to student relationships of some of its professors? The PSU student newspaper staff know that the NRO ad will lead to a lively student discussion for sure wrt PSU professors. We could see some other shoes dropping during that discussion . . . n’est ce pas? These student journalists might be pretty darn good if they are strategizing several steps ahead like that.

    John

  103. re: “Leo G says: October 31, 2012 at 11:43 pm A Nobel piece prize?”

    Mann’s Nobel piece prize for a quantum leap increase, beyond the original Piltdown Man’s discovery, in size of economic transfers, social enhancements and political transformations, accrued or claimed by their creators from mere cloth,invective and garbage.

  104. markx says:October 31, 2012 at 6:02 pm
    “Pretty cheap shot……

    ….but then again, if anyone was ever more deserving of a cheap shot…”

    Bearing in mind there’s a hockey stick involved….a slap shot!

  105. Mpaul, about Penn State investigating Mann:

    The ivory towers of academia, do they really have the ability to look at serious problems like a Mann or a Sandusky? Simpy, no. They don’t have the gusto to do it properly, and they have too many reasons to ignore bad behavior of their employees, least of which is funding.

    Penn State has proven, by it’s long, drawn out handling of Sandusky, that it lacks the ability to self correct. It had to be ever pressured and the problem is still being addressed. Now the ex-president is being sued. It too all this time.

    Penn State has a lot of funding to lose if they look too closely. They can only do it if we drag them screaming and kicking. Steyn and NRO will win. When exaggerated science loses, real science wins. It’s going to be a long drawn out brawl.

    Round one definitely goes to Steyn and NRO. Two knockdown.

  106. The ex-Pres of Penn State is charged today with cover up.
    Cover up cases move painfully slowly.
    Hard way for an educator to learn.
    The consequences of the tree ring circus are also ahead.

  107. There is no Nobel Prize for economics.

    The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, commonly referred to as the Nobel Prize in Economics, but officially the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel. It was established and endowed by Sweden’s central bank Sveriges Riksbank, in 1968 on the occasion of the bank’s 300th anniversary, in memory of Alfred Nobel. It is awarded by the Nobel Foundation but it is not a Nobel Prize.

  108. Read agrimarc, above, thanks for that report on Spanier. This is huge.

    The very guy who oversaw Sandusky getting off and Mann getting off…..Graham Spanier, Ex-president of the school …
    is now the vortex that will suck Mann back into the hot seat! Mann. Mann is toast in the world’s slowest toaster.

    Say the word “Spanier” to Mann’s face and watch him flinch. He thought he was off the hook since his buddy quit. Oh oh.

    Some people simply feel they are above the rules. Sandusky and Mann have been doing their funny-business, insulated beneath mountains of money that they attract and that muddles the thinking at Penn State.

  109. As a Nobel Laureate myself (for I, too, share the IPCC/ManBearPig four-boxtops “peace” prize for my distinguished, important, astounding, ground-breaking, world-beating, intergalactically-significant contribution to eradicating one of the numerous errors in the Fourth Assessment Report), I do congratulate my fellow-prizewinner Mickey Mouse from Penn & Jerry U.

    My Nobel Peace Prize badge, showing the head of old Alf himself, was made by Prof. David Douglass of Rochester University, using gold recovered from a physics experiment 35 years previously and awarded to me in a handsome presentation box when I gave a seminar on climate sensitivity to his Physics faculty a few years back.

    Funny that the climate-extremist blogs have been silent about Mickey’s ambitious claim to be a Nobel Prizewinner, when they huffingtoned and puffingtoned so much about my own claim to the same effect, even though Mickey’s claim was serious and mine was a joke.

    Could there be some sort of a double standard here? I think we should be told. Meanwhile, I wear my Prize Pin with pride.

  110. BREAKING: Penn State faculty member and ex-President Graham Spanier is criminally charged:

    Pennsylvania’s Attorney General announces charges against Penn State professor and ex-President Graham Spanier

    Ex-Penn State president charged in Sandusky case

    Kevin Johnson and Doug Stanglin
    USA TODAY

    1:51PM EDT November 1. 2012 – Former Penn State president Graham Spanier and two other former administrators were charged Thursday with perjury, obstruction of justice, and endangering children in connection with their handling of the Jerry Sandusky sex abuse scandal.

    Prosecutors said all three officials knew of complaints involving Sandusky, an assistant football coach, showering with boys in 1998 and 2001 and failed to take action to stop it.

    “This is about three powerful and influential men, three men who used their positions at Penn State to cover-up and conceal the activities of (Sandusky),” said Pennsylvania Attorney General Linda Kelly in announcing the charges….
    …..

    ….Penn State spokesman David La Torre said Thursday that Spanier, who continued to serve as a tenured professor after he was fired as president in November, “will be placed on leave, effective immediately.”

  111. Thanks for the great laugh! My immediate reaction: “Oh f**k me, remind me never to cross the National Review!”

    Well played.

  112. Reed Coray says:
    November 1, 2012 at 9:25 am

    What say you?…..
    _____________________________________________

    The motives of NRO are clear.

    The motives of the paper are less obvious but I will suggest that human nature prevails.
    The paper editor wanted the notoriety…. for his next personal career objective…. and is willing to say or do anything to get noticed….kids…. trying to make a splash.

    Normally notoriety seekers do so under the guise of legitimate issues and false virtue…in this case…”The Truth”.

    If the paper is interested in the truth, they would put one of their student reporters in the Mann’s office. HAR HAR… like a left wing student paper would actually want to challenge one of their priests…

    More likely the paper is a whore… taking money…under the guise of principle but really in opposition to their lefty principles for cash.

    Now that we know the paper is a whore, when can buy that whore for short money for all sorts of purposes. Lets start a collection. Let’s see if we can raise some cash to pay off a student to write an article about their Mann-God, criticizing his claim to be a Nobel Laureate.

    Human nature will prevail….they will take the money and sell their principles.

    Rich Lowry, a genius, at NRO knew the paper would step up and prostitute themselves. You can always count on a green leftest to have no character. eg Peter Gleick,

  113. Monckton of Brenchley says:
    November 1, 2012 at 11:15 am

    “[...amusing stuff omitted...]
    Meanwhile, I wear my Prize Pin with pride.”

    And it’s odds on you don’t point out your Prize Pin when initiating legal actions, eh?

  114. Monckton of Brenchley says:
    November 1, 2012 at 11:15 am
    Funny that the climate-extremist blogs have been silent about Mickey’s ambitious claim to be a Nobel Prizewinner, when they huffingtoned and puffingtoned so much about my own claim to the same effect, even though Mickey’s claim was serious and mine was a joke.
    ====================================================================
    And Mann must have known yet he’d let himself be introduced as one.

  115. Parody starts/

    I have a vague idea of a tentative grade B movie plot that includes this quasi-legal disclaimer => my tentative movie plot is not even remotely suggested by the antics of PSU Prof Mann, PSU’s previous incomplete investigation of Mann, Mann’s lawsuit against NRO and NRO’s recent exposure of Mann’s lack of integrity.

    Suggested movie title: Academia Angst in America {subtitled: It isn’t blackmail if a university does it}

    The plot contains:

    – scandal ridden Pea State University (PeaSU) has a proposal for its previously investigated Professor Malevolent Mouse (MM) whose loose cannon litigations against any critic expose PeaSU to additional crippling scandals. PeaSU suggests Prof MM to seek other employment in return for PeaSU not initiating another investigation which will be by an outside independent task force instead of the last one that was an incomplete and biased internal investigation of MM.

    – MM tells PeaSU to ‘stick your proposal where the sun doesn’t shine’

    – in the remainder of the movie MM, because of his narcissistic actions, causes a ripple effect which takes down the professional positions of his former confederates in: PeaSU; the IPCCCP; University of Virgins in Virginia; Really Climatic blog; and the Fawning MSM Team.

    – near the end of the movie MM is seen doing TV ads for male enhancement drugs out of his WWF provided mud hut

    -The movie’s closing scene shows MM mumbling “if it is the last thing I do, I will have all those scum skeptics carbonized like Hans Solo was at the end of Star Wars Episode 5. I will hang their carbonized bodies on my wall like Jaba the Hut did with Hans’ carbonized body. MM smiles as the scene fades away to the end.

    Parody ends/

    : )

    John

  116. You don’t tug on Superman’s cape
    You don’t spit into the wind
    You don’t pull the mask of that ol’ Lone Ranger
    And you don’t mess around with Rich Lowry.

  117. “Had Dr Mann‘s conduct of his research been outside the range of accepted practices, it would have been impossible for him to receive so many awards and recognitions, which typically involve intense scrutiny from scientists who may or may not agree with his scientific conclusions”

    This statement was in the PSU Final Investigation Report into Mann. Claiming to be a Nobel Laureate when you are not is strangely within “the range of accepted practices” which all those scientists who subjected Mann to “intense scrutiny” so diligently adhere to.

    What would a psychiatrist make of a Mann who not only claims to be something he isn’t but who takes his lacklustre proxy and sticks on the end of it a grotesque instrumental erection to hide the decline and spends the next few years waving the monstrosity in our faces?

    http://uk.askmen.com/sports/health_200/232_penis-fracture.html

  118. Dr. Mann should’ve followed example of Dr. Caldeira who ( is it coincidence?) started career at Penn State and who keeps relatively low public profile with his geo-engineering fantasies and who attracts attention only of powerful people. Then he, as Dr. Caldeira, would dine with a computer mogul, vacation on a yacht of a rock star, and give interviews to “Freakonomics”. Instead, Dr. Mann got involved with Gavin, James, and Rajendra. Hmmm… Will Rodney and Henry continue insisting that this is “old normal”?

  119. John Whitman says:
    November 1, 2012 at 12:22 pm

    I like it. Could we get Danny DiVito to play Professor Malevolent Mouse and Bernie Madoff to play the PeaSU President?

  120. “What a piece of work is Mann, how nobel in reason” with apologies to Rado, Ragni and MacDermott of Hair and the Bard of Avon.

  121. The leadership at Penn must be extremely concerned about the indictment of Spanier and the prospect of many more months with the public spotlight back on the Sardusky affair (just as things were starting to quieten down).

    Imagine how thrilled they must be with Dr Mann, his lawsuit, and the ridicule it has already attracted. I can’t imagine our Mike will be receiving too many invitations to the parties in the administration buildings.

    They have a lot of doo doo to deal with!

  122. RayG says:
    It seems that someone has thrown a spannier into the works.

    Brilliant!

    You are hereby awarded a Nobel Prize in Punnery, you clever rascal.

  123. I have decided to award myself the Nobel peace prize. What is the proper procedure for this? Should I sent out a press release first and then make my own certificate? Or is the usual method to just to list it on my resume and take an imperious and elitist attitude towards any peasants who challenge me about this claim? Could Mr Mann perhaps publish a paper on this topic?

  124. Judith Curry opined that Mann’s lawsuit would not turn out well for him. It is too early to conclude if she was right, but it has certainly not started well for him!

  125. Soulda / Coulda Doc Mann

    http://www.nps.gov/chcu/index.htm

    He coulda/shulda have taken the wife and kids on say a two week vacation.

    Walked about, took a good look and photos of the rocks leaning, the sun infomation, the moon information, the cycles, the long gone old ones.

    Then two and two =’s four.

    Sometimes it is hot and dry.
    Sometimes it is cold and wet.
    Sometimes it is hot and wet.
    Sometimes it is cold and dry.
    Sometimes you have to make Mann fit in.
    Sometimes Mann does none of the above.
    Some times Mann looks the fool.

  126. Brilliant one, NRO!

    Now let’s see if I have this straight:
    First Manny sues NRO for defamation and otherwise suggesting he is a pedaphooey or something because he read something you printed that had Sandusky’s name in it.

    In his suit Manny states clearly and frequently about how he is a ‘Nobel Prize’ awardee or something and about how NRO has hurt him and his reputation.

    NRO along with others discovers courtesy of the Nobel Prize Committee that they do not have any laureates with the name of Manny.

    Then Manny Manniacal has to spend countless hours blocking pertinent questions and comments on twittery, facebook and who knows where else, (RC?).

    Now NRO takes out a beautiful full page ad in the Penn State Newspaper ‘The Daily Collegian’ so that everyone knows Manny lad is scientist extradonaire and near scientist royaly… Fooled ya!

    Now that Manniacal nut has got to walk places on campus, maybe eat lunch on campus. What I want to know is how Manniacal is going to block people when they snicker, giggle, break up laughing, fart, catcall, heckle or just point and belly laugh?

    Then again, maybe I don’t but the Penn State police should…

  127. It appears that Dr. Mann is continuing his tendency to be loose about facts. Obviously, his IPCC “training” has continued to be useful to him in his statements about facts. He appears to continue to misrepresent them. Perhaps he would enter a debate I have tried to arrange for over 4 years about the proof of the IPCC theory he espouses. I am not a rich man and offer $100,000 to the winner and $10,000 to the loser. One major rule; full, true and plain disclosure in all communications (similar to the rules which apply to officers of publicly listed corporations) with similar penalties (huge fines, long jail terms and prohibition from ever getting any public funds (research, contracts, pensions, etc) or holding ANY OFFICE EVEN partially funded by the public. I can get lots of skeptics to debate but no supporter of the IPCC theory. Perhaps Dr. Mann would accept? I would undertake to try to get other contributors so as to raise the prizes by 100 fold.
    , to several times a Nobel award.

  128. “Doug says:
    October 31, 2012 at 8:27 pm
    Brian Lemon, thanks for posting the digital hard copy. I looked at the online version, but no ads there. Love actually seeing it in print.”
    Doug – see page 7 of the online version. It’s a full page.

  129. You can tell that the lord of powerless lord-dome is upon us when your belly shakes so hard from laughtger that you fell like an airplane loosing an engine.

  130. The Minnesotans 4 Global Warming need to play their Original “Hide the Decline” song again…. I loved that song. Steyn should buy the rights to it and play it every day……..;-)

    (Manne filed against them for playing it, so they had to change the lyrics and the video cartoon apparently)

  131. Pamela Gray says: October 31, 2012 at 6:04 pm
    Claiming a Nobel Prize where none has been given is fraud. Not a laughing matter. It lends credence to the charge of fraud often spoken by many skeptics and ridiculed as being paranoid by AGWers.

    Agreed fully. However, the biggest punishment one can deal this crowd is to mock them mercilessly. Drives ‘em nuts. As was once said, don’t pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel. Steyn has the intelligence, the wit, the guts, to smack Mann down. Not to mention that he has been down this road before with the Canadian government. Besides, NR warned Mann not to go here. Any public humiliation is on the Warmistas, and helps bring the matter to the public eye.

  132. One problem I have, if I’m given a newspaper to read, I go from cover to cover.

    Did the same here, and realized there are some people there with higher camaraderie than Dr Mann.

    On page 12, there’s an article about The Penn State women’s ice hockey team:

    “…The Penn State women’s ice hockey team adorned its sticks with yellow tape last weekend
    to support cheerleader Paige Raque in her recovery efforts.

    Raque, a 19-year old varsity cheerleader, fell 39 feet out of a window from the fifth floor of
    Calder Commons on Oct. 13. She sustained severe head trauma and other injuries but has since
    been taken off a ventilator.

    Assistant coach Casey McCullion said she got the idea for the tape from the field hockey players,
    who wore ribbon in their hair. “I felt like it was important for us to show our support as well,” McCullion said. “[To] just show the Raque family, as well as Paige, that we’re supporting her
    and wishing her well as she goes through recovery…”

    So how about it, Dr Mann: show some school spirit – put some yellow tape on your Hockey Stick in support of Paige.

  133. The indictment of Spanier & co. over their long-term sexual abuse cover-up must be giving some BBC bigshots some flutters re their cover-up of Jimmy Savile’s long-term sexual abuse.

  134. @ Roger
    I’m no fan of either the BBC or Savile, but sfaia, Savile was not convicted of child abuse (and is not likely to be since he’s dead).

  135. Reviewing: Step 1: You’re upset and feel defamed because someone put in print that you tortured data to serve your own ends. Step 2: You torture data for the purpose of self-gratifcation – in print – to the court. Observation: Truth is an absolute defense and you are a public person. Question: After your case is dismissed, how are people to regard you when they know that the most objectionable things to have been said about you are absolutely true when you went and proved it in court right down to the last gory bit? Follow up Q: Now that your hockey stick has been disappeared too, how’s the rest of your week looking?

  136. Manfred says:

    November 1, 2012 at 1:05 am

    Ouch!
    I’m wondering, where are his friends and colleagues in his time of need?
    Surely someone can pop up out of the woodwork and claim Dr Mann had forgotten to take his meds that day?

    I nominate fellow faux Nobel Laureate Kevin Trenberth for the task.

    http://www.climatedepot.com/a/18203/Warmist-Kevin-Trenberth-mimics-Manns-Nobel-Prize-claims-Trenberths-online-CV-lists-himself-as-Nobel-Laureate–Nobel-Laureate-shared-for-Nobel-Peace-Prize-2007-as-part-of-IPCC-Oct-2007

  137. Wow, maybe I should have not quit coffee, because if I still drank it, would not have to clean my LCD Monitor off of normal spit.

    LMAO Brilliant. Well done.

  138. @ jim2 says:
    November 2, 2012 at 6:33 am

    Here’s a great article from The Street about how solar panels fail to work, but it is not reported or even widely known in most cases.
    ************
    I wonder how many documents could be FOIA’ed from public solar installations?

  139. For anyone who’s seen a copy of his book, was there language regarding the prize that might require revision in a second edition? If so, would that make the first edition collectible?

  140. So, is Mann looking for the nearest wall to throw his head against ? It’s got hurt less than that advert. he he. Steyn you are brilliant;

  141. Not only climate sceptics get bad treatment by colleagues and “superiors”.
    Look at this lecture delivered by the 2011 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Dan Shechtman.

    http://www.nobelprize.org/mediaplayer/index.php?id=1731&view=2

    Note the treatment he got from his group leader and the Nobel Laureate Prof. Linus Pauling (
    Nobel Laureate twice(1954, THE NOBEL PRIZE IN CHEMISTRY,1962, THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE)). A question that arises having seen this clip is: Are the Nobel prizes good or bad for science, are the prizes putting the recipients on a pedestal from which they can exert too much clout stopping or destroying careers of good scientists? Pls note Prof. Linus Pauling´s statement
    “there are no quasi crystals just quasi scientists”. Bad treatment of people that think outside the “consensus” is nothing new. Sadly.

  142. Did anyone notice the college paper’s editorial cartoon?
    [paper linked at top]

    It shows Frankenstein, “Sandy” emblazoned on his shirt, holding hands with the Bride of Frankenstein, labeled “Climate Change.”

  143. Michael Mann says he is a Nobel Prize winner, the Nobel Committee says he is not.

    Now I expect Michael Mann to sue the Nobel Committee.

  144. kbray in california says:
    October 31, 2012 at 5:58 pm
    Outstandingly embarrassing !
    With all that rain, there must be a fresh sinkhole nearby he can crawl into.

    His self-importance is so inflated he probably would not be able to crawl into any sinkhole!!

  145. I think this story is not important enough to be at the top of the page; for one day fine, but not more. It would be far better to answer the spate of ‘Superstorm’ Sandy articles in the media than all this nonsense about unbalanced personalities like Mann.

  146. Dave says:
    October 31, 2012 at 6:41 pm
    “Me thinks that Mann is a denier… he denied reality when stating that he’s a Nobel laureate. One has to think that there are some at Penn State that believe that Mann is a distraction at best and an idiot at worst. As for me… I’m leaning towards the conclusion that he’s an idiot.

    Megakudos to those running the student newspaper at Penn State! They had the guts to do what the administration of that school couldn’t… or wouldn’t.”

    I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that the Board/Trustees/(Whatever) of Penn State encouraged the journal to accept and run the ad. Takes a little bit of the searchlight away from the on-going Sandusky fallout!

  147. Carsten Arnholm, Norway says:
    November 1, 2012 at 12:26 am
    re: SasjaL @ October 31, 2012 at 7:27 pm

    “Stortinget is the Norwegian parliament, not the government. Otherwise you are correct that the Nobel committee members are politically appointed. It is a parking spot for useless former politicians.”

    Is there any other type of former politician?

  148. Wait! I think I may have this figured out as to why Mike thinks he won a Nobel Prize. OK, Mike? (I know you read this site) check the packaging your Nobel announcement came in. Does it have the same post mark as the one where Peter Gleick has his office or his home? Yeah, thought so…

  149. GlynnMhor

    Apparently the last-mentioned Rigoberta Menchu was accused of stretching the truth a bit …

    More than a bit. As documented by David Stoll (“Rigoberta Menchu and the Story of All Poor Guatamalans”, 1999) she essentially reinvented her life to fit the revolutionary model. Starting with the claim (on page 1 of her book) that she had had no education, when in fact she was the favored child of the family, i.e. the one who went to school until late adolescence, when the Civil War broke out. Her tale goes on and on from there with OTT accounts about her family’s role in the revolution and the way they died at the hands of the army (e.g. by being crucified in the village square (or something like that) with the corpse left on a hill top to be eaten by animals). (Several were actually killed, but not in the Grand Guignol manner that she describes.)

    Ms. Menchu far outdistances Dr. Mann in the let’s-pretend sweepstakes.

  150. Plaintiff Michael Mann has lost his case by including provably false claims in his brief submitted Oct. 22, 2012. Claiming to share a Nobel Prize is exactly the type of professional misconduct his critics are accusing him of, which leaves his slander suit without merit.

  151. From now on, let him be known as “Nobel Mann”.
    He’s a real Nobel Mann,
    Sitting in his Nobel Land,
    Making all his Nobel plans
    For nobody.
    Apologies to the Beatles.

  152. I suppose one could have a condition called “Nobel Prize Corruption,” where the desire to win a Nobel Prize promotes dishonest work, however, I think the clouding of critical judgment by a desire to do something good is the most predominant factor. Preventing Climate Change by forcing the use of green energy, has widely been promoted to be an urgently needed, good thing to do–perhaps as a result of a culture being present at most major institutions of higher learning that promotes environmental activism as a just and noble cause .

    (I note that some European news-sources have articles stating that failure to re-elect the President in the US would be an unmitigated global climate change disaster because the Governor does not support the urgent need to adopt a green agenda. An agenda, which I believe, as an implied consequence or hidden codicil, can only support a global human population of less than one billion persons.)

  153. Darren Potter says:
    “National Review decided to offer congratulations to Dr. Mann”
    “Sure it is Halloween?
    Because it sure seems like Christmas!”

    Halloween equals Christmas since Oct. 31 = Dec. 25

  154. David Jojnes says:
    November 2, 2012 at 11:57 am

    Is there any other type of former politician?

    I wouldn’t call Lord Lawson useless.

  155. I am a 100% sceptic and a regular reader of this site, but I do not like to see the site personalize and try to ridicule individuals who hold a totally opposite view. Stick to the science even when the warmists don’t, that way the site will achieve increasing respect and authority. Doing what I call silly stunts like taking this ad.to personally embarrass an opponent is not necessary and should be stopped. Let us act like professional people dealing with a very serious subject which is important to the world audience. That way we will gain an increasing voice of authority, But by doing these silly stunts and attaching hurtful names to individuals, we run the risk of not being accepted as an important and respected authority on the world stage..

  156. George Lawson says: “Stick to the science even when the warmists don’t, that way the site will achieve increasing respect and authority. Doing what I call silly stunts like taking this ad.to personally embarrass an opponent is not necessary and should be stopped.”
    ==============================================================

    Funny, that at the same time you are calling the comments on this thread “silly stunts”. Does not sound respectful to me. Looks like you wanted to “personally embarrass an opponent” by that.

    Besides, falsely declaring himself a “Nobel Prize Winner” is not a scientific issue. Manipulating data or committing a fraud is not a purely scientific issue either.

Comments are closed.