The tolerant left: these are not the questions we are looking for

In this priceless yet disturbing Twitter exchange with American Meteorological Society president Dr. Marshall Shepherd, Bishop Hill points out another case of Mann Overboard!

It started out innocently enough:

Twitter / DrShepherd2013

[Shepherd] learned n strange emails/blogs some disagree with my #Tedx Talk, @MichaelEMann HockeyStick discredited (hasn’t), & wx varies-gee “who knew”

[Bishop Hill] @DrShepherd2013 I attended a debate with a paleoclimate guy a few months ago. In q&a he was asked about hockey stick. He said “it’s broken”.

Here’s the full exchange:

Shepher_twitterCapture

Shpherd-MannCapture

Source: [ http://twitter.com/DrShepherd2013/status/343338700379389952 ]

- Bishop Hill blog – Sheep or shepherd?

Moments later, Shepherd blocked me.

About these ads

112 thoughts on “The tolerant left: these are not the questions we are looking for

  1. Mann must get arm ache, walking around with his fingers in his ears going LA LA LA all day.

  2. ^^^ I suggest you both go back and read the post properly
    Comments like these do WUWT no favours! [bring back the mods!]

    [Reply: this mod wonders which of the last 3 comments you were referring to?
    mod.]

  3. Btw, today’s the first day this year that I’m wearing short PJs. June 8th. It’s been THAT cold so far.

  4. I turned my furnace back to on in Southern Ontario today. Where is this AGW love. Bring it on. Haven’t seen the sun for 2 weeks!!!!!!!

  5. I live in southern Ontario, and I had to bring out my winter coat in this first week in June to walk my dog. I have never had to do this before in the month of June, having lived where I do for the past 50 years. Weather is not climate, I know, but for pete’s sake, we in Canada have been looking forward to global warming for so long now – nothing but disappointment so far.

  6. Lynched, burned at the stake, or otherwise killed.

    Whipped, beaten, and/or tarred and feathered.

    Persecuted and prosecuted by authorities willing to use any bit of secret info they can dig up, real or otherwise, to punish those who would oppose them.

    Blocked on Twitter. Or the Graudian. Or ReallyRealClimate. Or SkepSci.

    The sacrifices asked of those in service to the truth are indeed great. Lord, grant us the strength to persevere through this suffering.

  7. Odd how this sort of ‘scientist’ tend to shrivel up in the glare of open debate. They seem to only be able to thrive in protected and reified environments, fed on green funds, self delusion and far, far away from the public gaze.

  8. Its like I keep commenting, these sorts will take this “agenda” to their graves – they will NEVER admit to their errors, ( probably rather, subversion ). It’s nothing less than a war now, no need to play nice – that went away a long long time ago.

  9. WTF says: “I turned my furnace back to on in Southern Ontario today. Where is this AGW love. Bring it on. Haven’t seen the sun for 2 weeks!!!!!!!”

    We turned our furnace back on yesterday in Southern California!

  10. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

    I feel Shepherd will come to mightily regret that he was lured into such misbehaviour by one so controversial as Mann.

    This really does not send a good message to the world about either Shepherd’s integrity, nor the strength of the warmist case.

    And the casual observer might wonder just what that mildest of men – Andrew Montford aka Bishop Hill – has done to upset them so much that he has to be banned. Possibly they will discover that he wrote the definitive history of how the Hockey Stick came to be broken and so incurred the wrath of all those who had inadvisedly bet their careers on it remaining as unchallenged ‘truth’.

    McIntyre and McKitirck did the hard forensic work, but Mr Montford brought the story to life in his great book ‘The Hockey Stick Illusion’. Think of him as Watson to McSteve’s Sherlock.

    And for what did Shepherd blunder so badly? He will make no new friends by this and will likely cement old emnities and start some new ones.

    Very poor judgement. Expected of one of Mann’s mistakenly awestruck grad students, but completely unworthy of the President of a (once) prestigious professional society. Together with his laughably lightweight TED talk, I wonder how long he will last in post?

  11. “Nobel prize winner” Mann lives in his own fantasy world.

    He has now resorted to defending his fraudulent data grafting pretense at science in the “did…didn’t” world of twitter. Says it all.

  12. To get a broader view of the climate fight and why Dr. Shepherd’s blocking is a prime example of why Warmists are losing I suggest you see Pointman’s post

    How to run a really bad infowar campaign.

    It’s perhaps a debatable opinion, but I think the main way that a lot people found out there actually was such a thing as the climate skeptic blogosphere, was that its existence was highlighted by the alarmists themselves. In the complete absence of any PR budget, it was actually the alarmists who by attacking it, inadvertently spread the word that there was an alternative narrative on offer from a small skeptic community in the blogosphere. That mistake was the shape of blunders to come………………

    http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/how-to-run-a-really-bad-infowar-campaign/

  13. Bishop Hill blog – Sheep or shepherd?

    Moments later, Shepherd blocked me.

    That’s ba-a-a-a-a-d.

  14. jorgekafkazar says: We turned our furnace back on yesterday in Southern California!

    If you could get to a local beach with access to the Pacific Ocean, couldn’t you be getting a nice hot bath in those ever-warming waters?

    Be sure to check for a sign from California Department of Parks & Recreation reading “Ocean water is acidic. Swim at your own risk.”

  15. jorgekafkazar says:

    June 8, 2013 at 12:47 pm

    WTF says: “I turned my furnace back to on in Southern Ontario today. Where is this AGW love. Bring it on. Haven’t seen the sun for 2 weeks!!!!!!!”

    We turned our furnace back on yesterday in Southern California!

    ———————————————————————————————————————————–

    So we have more than a political class that is determined to bankrupt us then!! no sarc unfortunately

  16. So we have more than a political class IN COMMON that is determined to bankrupt us then!! no sarc unfortunately

    Doh

  17. Mr Shepherd says he won’t debate anything that isn’t published in peer- reviewed literature. Given the consistent manipulation of peer-review that Mr. Mann and his cohort have been engaged in, by their own admission, this suggests that Mr. Shepherd is really only willing to “debate” those who have declared themselves to be in 100% agreement with him.

  18. Bishop Hill blog – Sheep or shepherd?

    Moments later, Shepherd blocked me.

    Ewe should be ashamed.

  19. It seems to me that Mann & Company don’t realize that the global warming war is not about warming but rather carbon dioxide not being the root cause of the observed warming from 1980 to 1996. The green dot temperature line in the chart in the twitter exchange started rising about 1820, thereby proving that the root cause could not be carbon dioxide. I don’t believe any of them have testified under oath in a courtroom with a tough hardnosed lawyer doing the cross examination.

  20. So how is Mann v. Steyn progressing, anyway? I hope it wasn’t simply dismissed as a SLAPP, because it’s the discovery that is going to prove Mann and his allies committed fraud.

  21. Sounds like a good opportunity to check the integrity of the scientific community. No 30 questions required. Ask them point blank. Is Mann’s hockey stick valid?

  22. @ Jimbo,
    Absolutely. The thing which drew me to look at the skeptical view of AGW was the intense vitriol directed at those who voiced the slightest criticism.
    I could not believe that a well-founded theory would require such name-calling and pejorative diatribe.
    Having thus looked into the matter, I came to realise that it is precisely because there are gaping holes in the theory that proponents find a need to lash out. But argumenta ad homines do not substitute for evidence.
    I think a more moderate approach to their critics would have been more successful. Censorship, attributing opposition ideas to psychological problems, appeal to a special cohort of leaders as the only ones who can know the ‘real’ truth, ridicule and resort to the sanction of laws…… all this is redolent with the tactics used in one party states and dictatorships.
    And often, these things seem to come from the left-leaning side of politics, that is to say, the very people who we might look to for the defense of our freedom of expression and the exchange of ideas.
    This is the kind of intellectually anomalous behaviour which first brought a different view of AGW to my attention.

  23. Beta Blocker says:
    June 8, 2013 at 1:18 pm
    jorgekafkazar says…
    Be sure to check for a sign from California Department of Parks & Recreation reading “Ocean water is acidic. Swim at your own risk.”

    You may be engaged in sarcasm, but anything is possible in California. So, I ask in all sincerity, is this an actual sign on a California beach?

  24. @Kohl
    “The thing which drew me to look at the skeptical view of AGW was the intense vitriol directed at those who voiced the slightest criticism.”

    I can assure you that sort of thing doesn’t happen here.

  25. *chuckles* I am also in Southern Ontario, in one of the areas where they desperately want to build the most Massive wind turbines on the continent…

    We’ve had our heat on several times the past week. I should Not have to be wearing a jacket to work outside!

    Say btw, my wife chimed in: ‘Be grateful for all the gas we have for heating, it is cheaper than electricity!’

    Especially when ‘green’ energy is set to rachet up electricity prices by 40%, if those turbines get built.

  26. Bill Parsons says:
    June 8, 2013 at 1:21 pm

    “Bishop Hill blog – Sheep or shepherd?
    Moments later, Shepherd blocked me.
    Ewe should be ashamed.”

    Mann and Shepherd are more bellwethers than sheep.

  27. Perhaps a bit elliptical my last comment – I was being literal, having raised sheep in an earlier life:

    “A bellwether is any entity in a given arena that serves to create or influence trends or to presage future happenings.

    The term is derived from the Middle English bellewether and refers to the practice of placing a bell around the neck of a castrated ram (a wether) leading his flock of sheep. The movements of the flock could be noted by hearing the bell before the flock was in sight.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellwether

  28. Mr. Shepherd’ s world is going to become very small when all he has left to tweet to is Mann’s echo chamber. Maybe there’s a causal link between the AMS corporate attitude and the observation that meteorologists don’t seem to display their affiliation so much any more…

  29. Thank you Margaret.
    As an occasional commenter here over 2 or 3 years I am aware of that.
    To expand: my curiosity was piqued when I read continuing comments made by some apparently eminent scientists.
    As I read more widely and became aware of attempts by some such scientists (not all) to actually block contrary views (in the scientific literature no less!); to restrict access to their supporting evidence; and to censor comment at blogs such as Real Climate; well then I became very skeptical indeed – scientific knowledge stands or falls on the evidence. And from the time of the ancient Greek Philosophers the discourse of ideas is at the very centre of Western culture and science. That is what has made it so successful.
    Then came ‘Climategate’ and it revealed an intellectually bankrupt coterie of scientists who had gone over to ‘the dark side’.
    Having been discovered, what did they do? Simply, more of the same.
    Here, manifest for all, was a fundamental abandonment of scientific principle in the most intellectually dishonest manner which it was possible to imagine.

  30. As much as Mann enrages me with his antics I can’t help shake this sickening pity for him. I don’t know why but it’s a little like watching Gollum argue with himself.

  31. Sickening pity? It’s kind of the ‘Magic Christian’ question – what’s your price?

  32. WTF says:
    June 8, 2013 at 1:31 pm

    JFD
    Problem is you can’t tax the sun.
    ###

    O ye of little faith.

  33. The Alarmist side essentially needed to, and does so even more now, shut down debate altogether. The rallying cry was “the debate is over, now we must act”. Towards the end of ’07, I very innocently went in search of the official arguments showing manmade warming, in order to better reply to what I saw as nothing but a crank in some letters to the editor of a local paper. I just assumed it was true, since it was all I heard. My one saving grace was that I did not go to see AIT. I hate to think it, but seeing that bilge may have altered my path toward truth-seeking greatly. Then again, perhaps it would have raised more questions than answered. In any case, one thing I noticed with the pro-CAGW arguments was a marked tendency to shut down even innocent questions. That, combined with their cry of “the debate is over” actually spurred me to look more closely at the skeptics arguments. I was shocked to see that they more closely followed principles of logic, and their science was in fact very sound. It blew me away, as a Democrat (a party I now despise.)

  34. By refusing to debate or listen to “trolls” as he calls them, Mann reveals a very wide streak of rank yellow cowardice. So does that other blatherskite, Shepherd

    It sure looks like Mann knows his stuff is feces, and is desperately afraid of having his nakedness exhibited to the world at large. It’s as obvious to him as it is to anyone that if he does debate, he’ll get his head handed to him.

    In the same vein, our new Secretary of Energy, Ernest Moniz, purportedly a nuclear physicist, says “I don’t debate what is not debatable”. And our new Secretary of State, John Kerry of Swift Boat fame, likewise. Sanctimonious hypocrites and cowards all.

    The bad part is that these are cowards with power and the ability to do enormous harm. Der Fuehrer and Obersturmfuehrer Kerry are poreparing to negotiate a treaty with the UN that will subordinate the sovereignty of the developed countries to the dictators’ convention that is the UN, require them to renounce free speech and property rights, and hand over the wealth we created to people who have had absolutely no part in creating it and deserve zero credit for creating it. Where the hell does Kiribati’s few thousand ignoranuses (not a typo) get off thinking they have the right to rip us off and tell us how to live? I’d say that for whatever good things the people in Kiribati have, they are indebted to us, not the other way around. Tyranny and slavery as la mode.

    It is incredible that anyone would want to undo all the progresswe have made towards high standards of living, and yet not so incredible. We have had two generations of this wealth redistribution feces drummed into our schoolchildren and college students. And of course, lurking in the shadows are the crony capitalists and other elitists who expect to get richer as this de-development process goes forward.

    I can see us fighting a Second War of Independence if these people aren’t stopped.

  35. History will not treat the likes of Mann and Shepherd kindly. Since they had the opportunity to embrace skeptics and refused, the failures will come right back to their feet. They will become known as scientific buffoons.

  36. Steve says June 8, 2013 at 12:46 pm

    Its like I keep commenting, these sorts will take this “agenda” to their graves – they will NEVER admit to their errors, ( probably rather, subversion ). It’s nothing less than a war now, no need to play nice – that went away a long long time ago.

    Reminds of the George Bernard Shaw quote, which shortened goes:

    . . . . . “All progress depends on the unreasonable man.

    Full quote, shedding light on the reason why:

    The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

    .

  37. Gary, WRT “Mann and Shepherd are more bellwethers than sheep.”

    Yep. And since their bell goes off in pretty much all weathers, wouldn’t that make them… sheep for all seasons?

  38. Chad Wozniak says June 8, 2013 at 3:20 pm

    By refusing to debate or listen to “trolls” …

    The “you can’t handle the truth” segment comes to mind … but rather with the Bishop coming from Defense counsel’s (Tom Cruise) POV rather than Col. Jessup (Mann would be Jessup in this case, and notable for the ‘wrongs’ he believes are ‘right’):

    Defense: Colonel Jessep, did you order the code red!?
    Judge: You don’t have to answer the question.
    Jessup: I’ll answer the question. You want answers?
    Defense: I think I’m entitled.
    Jessup: You want answers?
    Defense: I want the truth!

    Pardon me if I indulge …

    .

  39. I don’t understand what the headline has to do with it. We all know that some left wingers can be just as intolerant as some right wingers, but the same goes in any situation where people hold firm opinions.

  40. Post modern science meets … those who fund them … The State.

    Lysenko Lives in the USSA!

  41. They will become known as scientific buffoons.

    Oh, I think that ship sailed a VERY long time ago. They ARE scienfitic buffoons with the intellect of children. Even children can learn the concept that the scientific method is absolute and not open to interpretation….and these “intellectual children” are simply the products of an education system that rewards copying of methods directly without thought into what those methods means. So no, they are buffoons who yes are intellectually stunted and the saddest thing of all is that they simply do not realize it!

  42. Question:

    Why did the USSR go along with, even encourage, Lysenko?

    I do not have an answer but see similarities with state-funded crimatology today. I really think this is an avenue that should be explored.

    One avenue is that politicos do not understand science and simply use thei scientists’ words as political weapons, while the policos fund the very self-same scientists.

  43. RoHa says:
    I don’t understand what the headline has to do with it. We all know that some left wingers can be just as intolerant as some right wingers …

    Agreed. What truly astonishes about this blunt refusal of open discussion is not that they are left or right, but that they are scientists. As a scientist, you always have to be ready to argue and defend your position rationally, and accept the possibility that you might be wrong.

    Anyone who really does experimental science will sooner or later be slapped around by experimental evidence contrary to his brilliant ideas sufficiently to accept this point. This is one of the greatest benefits of any real scientific education. You will not learn this quite so well, however, if all you ever do is theoretical modeling and computation.

  44. RoHa says:
    June 8, 2013 at 4:24 pm
    “I don’t understand what the headline has to do with it. We all know that some left wingers can be just as intolerant as some right wingers, but the same goes in any situation where people hold firm opinions.”

    I disagree. The core belief of leftists is that reason and logic have not brought about world peace and total equality in thousands of years, so reason and logic must be evil – therefore they abandon reason and logic and just do whatever they think works to turn the world into a socialist utopia. If stripping off your cloths works or they think it might work they do that. Alinsky said, don’t argue with facts, the facts are on the side of the enemy. He knew what he was talking about.

  45. Michael Palmer says:
    June 8, 2013 at 4:56 pm
    “Agreed. What truly astonishes about this blunt refusal of open discussion is not that they are left or right, but that they are scientists. ”

    94% of government scientists are leftists. This is natural, as they never worked in the private sector and the state is their sugardaddy – so they are statists. Socialism demands that the state controls all means of production, a natural belief system for a statist or a government scientists.

    They don’t even have an idea what we do in the private sector. They never got in touch with it.

  46. Mailman says:
    June 8, 2013 at 11:51 am
    This Mann fellow really is a nasty piece of work isn’t he.

    Mailman

    Now that seems a bit mean and unneccesary to me.

    Michael Mann reads this site and is a sensitive soul so please lay off him.

    He is fat, bald, stupid-looking and quite probably gives off an ancient and horrible fish-like smell but that does not give you the right to call him “a nasty piece of work”

    Mike, if you are reading, I share your pain…

  47. _Jim says:
    June 8, 2013 at 3:41 pm
    “Reminds of the George Bernard Shaw quote, which shortened goes:

    . . . . . “All progress depends on the unreasonable man.”

    Full quote, shedding light on the reason why:

    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.””

    George Bernard Shaw was a Fabian. Have they failed or have they succeeded? well, they periodically bring the UK to the verge of collapse, in the 70ies before Maggie Thatcher, and again under Blair and Brown. They are quite good at that, one must admit.

  48. Every so often I check in here to see if people are still paying attention to climate apparatchiks like Mann. I suppose that they will continue to be noticed as long as the government continues to throw our taxpayer dollars at them.

  49. Chad Wozniak says:
    June 8, 2013 at 3:20 pm
    “………. I can see us fighting a Second War of Independence if these people aren’t stopped.”

    I think we are in the early stages of that war now. As with all wars it will be affected by the weather – and currently it does not favor alarmists.

  50. DirkH says:

    94% of government scientists are leftists. This is natural, as they never worked in the private sector and the state is their sugardaddy – so they are statists. Socialism demands that the state controls all means of production, a natural belief system for a statist or a government scientists.

    Nonsense. I work in academia, and I have never met a colleague who advocated socialism in the proper sense, that is, control of all means of production by the state. And whether or not they do is completely immaterial to the question whether leftists have a monopoly on closed-mindedness.

    If one tries to look at each specific problem with an open mind, one will realize that neither the left nor the right has the best answer all the time. To find the best solutions, it is necessary that we remain willing to listen to the other side. The intense mutual contempt of the political left and the right is not only in poor taste; it is a very serious impediment to progress.

  51. Chad Wozniak 3:20pm says
    By refusing to debate or listen to “trolls” as he calls them, Mann reveals a very wide streak of yellow cowardice.

    Chad is stating what is becoming more and more obvious to anyone with any scientific background. Sec of Energy Moniz and Sec of State Kerry need to listen to their boss Pres Obama who made a speech Friday from the Fairmont Hotel in California in which he stated we needed to discuss and debate about striking a balance between safety and privacy. He went on to say, “I welcome this debate and think it’s healthy for democracy. I think it’s a sign of maturity because maybe 5 or 6 years ago we might not be having this debate.”
    Ben Franklin said that when you sacrifice liberty for security you ended up with neither.
    What would Ben say to Moniz or Kerry? They like Mann don’t want to debate. They want your tax dollars to fight the coming catastrophe. They want to liberate your hard earned monies and don’t feel your worthy of their explanations. In the end we will have less money, less liberty and no safety. We humbly request a little maturity in the climate debate. I think it’s the mature thing to do.

  52. I really love these Twitter debates:
    Is too!
    Is not!
    is too is too!
    is not is not!
    is too is too is too!
    is not is not is not!
    BLOCK!!
    There, that settled it….

  53. DirkH says June 8, 2013 at 5:34 pm
    … “All progress depends on the unreasonable man.” …

    George Bernard Shaw was a Fabian. Have they failed or have they succeeded?

    Even a stopped (analog, synchronous-motor driven or quartz-timed battery-powered digital – if I have to be specific about it) clock is correct twice a day! Perhaps even Fabians, down deep, recognize certain eternal truths about mankind? It is their goals and means/methods which contain the ‘fault’.

    .

  54. Mike, your definition of socialism is simplistic and propagandistic. Marx created socialism as a movement toward full totalitarian control. From beginning to bloody end, this large variation is all “Socialism”. Socialism is also racist; it’s also a class-based hatred mill: just a couple things that socialists are good at promoting here in the good ol’ USA. So there’s a lot to Marx’s socialism, the same system used by the current Bolsheviks who function to seize power, manipulate markets, control companies and banks, educational systems, rewrite history, etc, etc.

  55. It seems the Tom Wolfe observation is accurate. Politics is determined in high school. Athletes become conservatives, because they feel the pretty people should run things. The Drama club becomes liberals, because they believe that those in the know should run things. Those that do well in academics, but belong to neither above become libertarians, because we don’t trust either of the previous two groups to run anything.

    Mann can’t do math. He does pretty well as a drama queen. I wouldn’t trust him to run a frozen banana stand.

  56. Michael Palmer says: @ June 8, 2013 at 5:59 pm
    …..The intense mutual contempt of the political left and the right is not only in poor taste; it is a very serious impediment to progress.
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I will second that idea. You are correct no one has a monopoly on truth.

  57. I think he looks like a professional poker player.
    Quite a bluffer.
    Also theres a strong resemblance to a rodent.

    “Peter Crawford says:
    June 8, 2013 at 5:31 pm
    He is fat, bald, stupid-looking and quite probably gives off an ancient and horrible fish-like smell but that does not give you the right to call him “a nasty piece of work””

  58. Mann is no longer interesting. We know what he is. Shepard is much more bizarre because he still buys into that stuff. He is a poster child for all that is wrong with the mandarins of the climate establishment.

  59. I am another Ontario resident that has had the heat on again. It became unbearably cold, again.

    Yesterday I had the insulation guys in putting R40 into the upstairs bedroom ceiling. While the Tweeters are foaming at the mouth we are foaming walls and floor joists.

  60. Related, and worth sharing,,,, just saying,,,,,,,, history matters, no?

    Think about it>

  61. Well I think their attitude is a symbol of what has gone wrong with modern science. There is still a lot of careful measuring to do. The science isnt settled till the theory, model and observations all come together. We are obviously missing big chunks of data. Meanwhile Mann et all have their collective heads buried in their blocked tweets. Further they spent a lot of time manufacturing data to match thier theory and are probably still doing so. So what we should do is ignore them and go forth and measure things.

  62. The classic definition of socialism is ‘government ownership of the means of production,’ differing from communism which does not recognize any private property. But in the time since Marx, the socialists have learned that they need not own the means of production to control the means of production. Ownership no longer matters to the left. They now control through regulation and tax policy.

  63. Beta Blocker says:

    June 8, 2013 at 1:18 pm

    jorgekafkazar says: We turned our furnace back on yesterday in Southern California!

    If you could get to a local beach with access to the Pacific Ocean, couldn’t you be getting a nice hot bath in those ever-warming waters?

    Be sure to check for a sign from California Department of Parks & Recreation reading “Ocean water is acidic. Swim at your own risk.”

    Beta, this is absolute silliness. The Pacific Ocean along Calafornia is about 60 degrees this time of year and the PH at catalina is way up in the 8’s.
    v/r

  64. @Michael Palmer –

    You’re overlooking something: when “the state” owns everything, what really is going on is that a tiny powerful elite owns everything (e.g., in Soviet Russia, where 9,000 nomenklatura controlled 99 percent of the economy of a country of 300 million people). There is really no difference between this and the Fascist corporate state, which very closely approximates what our own der Fuehrer is acting to create, with his crony capitalist buddies as the beneficiaries. They will get richer still while ordinary folk, and especially the poor people of this world, suffer from overpriced, unreliable energy.

    Let’s not forget that Italian Fascism, and Nazism even more explicitly, were versions of socialism, with their ultimate roots also in Marxism. Nazi anti-Semitism was a formula obtained by equating the Marxist bourgeois class enemy with the Jews.

  65. Hmmm, evidence of digging a hole deeper. The last ones out will be left at the bottom, barely able to hear the others shout, “Hey, here’s another one!”.

  66. There has come into fashion a strange and easy manner of suppressing the revelations of history, of invaliding the commentaries of philosophy, of eliding all embarrassing facts and gloomy questions. A matter for declamations, say the clever. Declamations repeat the foolish. Jean-Jacques a declaimer, Voltaire on Calas, Labarre and Sirven, declaimers…

    Facts, however, are awkward thongs to disconcert, and they are obstinate.

    ———————————–

    There is, as we know, a philosophy which denies the infinite. There is also a philosophy, pathologically classified, which denies the sun; this philosophy is called blindness.

    Victor Hugo, Les Misérables, 1862

    Plus ça change, plus c’est la même

  67. Those who really believe in what they are saying, even if they are obviously wrong or ignorant, at least try to argue in favor of their point of view.

    Those who know that they are wrong, call others “trolls,” block them, explode in rants of incoherent invectives, or try some other means of evading the meaningful discussion or polluting it to the extent that any decent opponent has no other choice but to pinch his nose and “leave.”

    Mann and his accomplices always try to silence their opponents; if they can’t, they simply run away.

  68. “…fyi, I generally don’t debate anything that isn’t published in the peer-review lit, best regards…”

    Too bad. Cook et al actually found that 66.4% of abstracts he looked at actually expressed no position on AGW, while only 32.6% endorsed AGW.

    Seems to me he SHOULD debate those peer-reviewed papers that express no position in AGW.

  69. JEM says:
    June 8, 2013 at 2:49 pm
    Sickening pity? It’s kind of the ‘Magic Christian’ question – what’s your price?
    ==============================

    Eh?

  70. Many people above commented on unusually cold conditions prevailing this year.

    Here in the semi-arid southern foothills of San Juan mountains, this year’s spring was also unusually cold. Winter would seem to never end. However, last week every day in the afternoon was hot, while early in the morning it is still cold. The daily temperature differential is rather extreme: from 4 degrees C in the morning to 33 degrees C in the afternoon. That’s the temperature differential of almost 30 degrees C! That would be normal somewhere in Sahara or Gobi desert. Here in South Colorado the daily range of temperatures is usually about 10 degrees C narrower.

  71. Robert of Ottawa says:
    June 8, 2013 at 4:37 pm
    Question:

    Why did the USSR go along with, even encourage, Lysenko?

    The simple answer is that he told them what they wanted to hear, not what was correct.

  72. Robert of Ottawa says:
    June 8, 2013 at 4:37 pm
    Question:
    Why did the USSR go along with, even encourage, Lysenko?

    Because, you see, genetics (as well as cybernetics) was a “bourgeois science.”
    Such was a consensus among the Soviet scientists at the time.
    Those who paid their salaries (Stalin & Co.) didn’t like genetics.
    Therefore, science was settled, and not debatable.
    Deniers quickly ended up in labor camps or were summarily executed.

  73. @climatereason

    yes, of course, Hugo invented the thong ;)

    (apologies, it’s early Sunday morning)

  74. When Mann own ego final brings him down , the nature of some of the people who que up to kick him on the way down will be a surprise.

  75. “I’m loving it” that Mann has to rely on SK/science for his defence :-)

  76. sunderlandsteve says:
    June 9, 2013 at 2:12 am
    “I’m loving it” that Mann has to rely on SK/science for his defence :-)

    How deep did “official” climate science sink, to rely on a proven unreliable site, which fabricates dialogue to fit the narrative, not on data and scientific refutation.
    Ah, but wait, there is a certain pattern here…

  77. OssQss:

    Thanks, sorta, for posting the link to James Burke. If you follow it, you’ll find all of his Connections shows and other programs, posted by him. I’m watching them now.

    Sadly, James Burke, who taught me via these programs to understand connections and the importance of history in science, is a vocal AGW believer. If only someone would make a “Connections” show explaining how this all began and where it is today.

  78. . . . . . “All progress depends on the unreasonable man.”

    . . . And all regress.

  79. I don’t know, but to me this twitter exchange looks like standard operating procedure. Someone politely questions an aspect of the CAGW dogma, and the standard response is, “You’re wrong and if you can’t figure it out I can’t be bothered to explain it to you. Now go away and stop wasting my precious time.”

    It’s all very boring and predictable.

  80. “Together with his laughably lightweight TED talk, I wonder how long he will last in post?”

    I’ve become a pessimist in this regard. Attorney General Eric Holder refuses to resign. John Holdren and his co-authors, the Ehrlichs, were famously wrong in their predictions of overpopulation and catastrophe and casually suggested all kinds of nasty measures might be needed to control population. Did Holdren ever have to pay for his idiocy and his cold-blooded policy possibilities? No, he became an editor of Science and now Obama’s chief science advisor. So, I think even if it cools for the next 20 years (or stays flat which is what happened from 1945 to 1980 or so), few will get the comeuppance they deserve. Funding may go down for warmist topics but these people will still be picked as science advisors for politicians and still be interviewed about their latest scare stories.

  81. In Boston, the temperature didn’t even reach 60 degrees Friday (June 7), I had to wear a coat.
    Hey Michael Mann — sticking my fingers in my ears did NOT make me feel any warmer, and it doesn’t make you seem more authoritative either.

  82. paul s says:
    June 8, 2013 at 5:46 pm

    Why does this have to be about the Left???
    They made it so. It fits with their overall agenda. The “science” is simply a convenience for them.

  83. Margaret Hardman says: June 8, 2013 at 1:54 pm

    @Kohl
    “The thing which drew me to look at the skeptical view of AGW was the intense vitriol directed at those who voiced the slightest criticism.”
    I can assure you that sort of thing doesn’t happen here.

    :
    Fair point. Dissenting voices have been swamped with scorn since the new moderation policy came in.

    But float above that. It’s the empirical evidence and logic that sways the neutrals.

    And only the neutrals matter. We diehards (on both sides) are a tiny minority. We may be right. We may be wrong. It makes no difference. Politically, only swaying the majority matters. And that means finding a channel to communicate empirical evidence and logic.

    This is such a channel. Fear not, be rational and keep up the engagement.

    (NOTE: I say this even though I have disagreed with most of your comments that I have seen so far. I support your engagement because you have been polite$-but-not-weak and consistent and, as such, worthy of respect).

  84. Bruce Cobb says: June 9, 2013 at 6:45 am

    No, it is not about the left-right division.
    In the UK the right-wing has bought in to the green agenda in order to enforce conservative power structures…
    By restricting entry into markets…
    By raising energy prices…
    By encouraging green energy taxes and subsidies for ‘green’ power sources.

    This is completely different to the US. But the political forces work in alliance.
    The world is not just one country.

  85. Old science:

    I’ve written a paper about ???
    Let me read it.
    Ok.
    I think you may be wrong about this and this.
    Really? I’ll look into it and discuss it with you further and release a better paper.

    New science:

    I’ve written a paper about ???
    Let me read it.
    Ok.
    I think you may be wrong about this and this.
    Block:
    No Objections then? I must be right. The science is settled.

  86. Chad Wozniak says: @ June 8, 2013 at 9:33 pm

    @Michael Palmer –

    You’re overlooking something: when “the state” owns everything, what really is going on is that a tiny powerful elite owns everything (e.g., in Soviet Russia, where 9,000 nomenklatura controlled 99 percent of the economy of a country of 300 million people). There is really no difference between this and the Fascist corporate state, which very closely approximates what our own der Fuehrer is acting to create, with his crony capitalist buddies as the beneficiaries. They will get richer still while ordinary folk, and especially the poor people of this world, suffer from overpriced, unreliable energy….
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    The IMF has confirmed this.

    ….In many countries the distribution of income has become more unequal, and the top earners’ share of income in particular has risen dramatically. In the United States the share of the top 1 percent has close to tripled over the past three decades, now accounting for about 20 percent of total U.S. income (Alvaredo and others, 2012). At the same time, while the new convergence mentioned above has reduced the distance between advanced and developing economies….

    …A third significant cause of convergence is the higher proportion of income invested by emerging and developing countries—27.0 percent of GDP over the past decade compared with 20.5 percent in advanced economies….

    http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2012/09/dervis.htm

    Meanwhile the typical American worker has lost out
    Huff & Puff: U.S. Median Annual Wage Falls To $26,364 As Pessimism Reaches 10-Year High

    The Uncomfortable Truth About American Wages

    ….This finding of stagnant wages is unsettling, but also quite misleading. For one thing, this statistic includes only men who have jobs. In 1970, 94 percent of prime-age men worked, but by 2010, that number was only 81 percent. The decline in employment has been accompanied by increases in incarceration rates, higher rates of enrollment in the Social Security Disability Insurance program and more Americans struggling to find work. Because those without jobs are excluded from conventional analyses of Americans’ earnings, the statistics we most commonly see — those that illustrate a trend of wage stagnation — present an overly optimistic picture of the middle class.

    When we consider all working-age men, including those who are not working, the real earnings of the median male have actually declined by 19 percent since 1970… Men with less education face an even bleaker picture; earnings for the median man with a high school diploma and no further schooling fell by 41 percent from 1970 to 2010….

    An Australian Financial Review article published a comparison of the cost of employing skilled people. This is the total cost for a business not just the wage earned. For Australia with it’s carbon tax it is over $600/day, for the US, with all our regulations it is $400/day and in the free-wheeling third world under $200/day. So what we see is since the World Trade Organization ‘Outlawed’ tariffs the first world manufacturing industry, and even our clerical positions, have been transferred to lower cost countries. This means the middle class in first world countries is shrinking as is shown in the article above.

    This article shows where we are headed:

    http://news.yahoo.com/big-city-tiny-apartment-small-scale-living-trend-133442144.html

    Aaron McConnell doesn’t mind sharing a kitchen with seven neighbors. He’s fine in living quarters with just enough room for a twin bed, a corner desk and little else. Closets? Forget about it – he stores his clothing and other possessions on shelves and hooks.

    McConnell’s small-scale home life is part of a hot trend in U.S. real estate – micro apartments….
    Micros, also known as “hostel-style” apartments, usually offer less than 200 square feet (18.5 square meters) including private bathrooms, and they typically come furnished, sometimes with built-in beds and other amenities to save space.

    Most feature a group kitchen that may be shared among eight units, although units in McConnell’s complex are equipped with microwave ovens and small refrigerators. They also include Internet connections and utilities in the price of the rent. There are no elevators….

    This is the face of Agenda-21, wage slaves herded into cities as the USA is De-developed and returned to ‘Wildlands’
    SOURCES:
    Listing of US laws and bills

    Map

    Video on Agenda 21

  87. Gail Combs says:
    June 9, 2013 at 8:13 am

    The Control agenda has always been the end goal of the CAGW crowd. Sadly millions of people dont see what is really driving the core of their beliefs. Look at the Mann-SHepard ignorance of just turning off people with whom they disagree, IF it were simply about science and the implications of their findings there should be genuine concern, but there is none, so the real reason is elsewhere. I think you have hit the nail on the head and both of these men are avid OWG men.

  88. Expecting leaders of the green movement to discredit themselves is unrealistic.. Millions of people support their politics and hang on the “doom du jour” enviro pornography they splash around..

    Remember that it was politics that spawned the science in the first place.. Convinced that modern society (Capitalism) is killing the planet they wrote the conclusion first and then went on to back fill this political movement in any way possible..

    Really.. With our leaders selling our future and lifestyle overseas for quick profit they need an excuse to take the fall.. Environmentalism fits the bill twofold.. It enriches the leftists for their piece of the pie (pay off) and provides a running excuse for our ever decreasing standard of living..

    This is the deal that has nothing to do with science and everything to do with vanity, greed and power.. Our leftists should have been fighting for our jobs.. Instead they were handed a blank check (tax dollars) and pointed towards the theater arts department.. An offer that proved far to attractive for their creative minds to resist..

    Write, produce and direct your own political production..

  89. Facebook has “like”, Twitter has the dis(sent)like, but calls it block. Is there stats for un-followers?

  90. Margaret Hardman says:
    June 8, 2013 at 1:54 pm

    I can assure you that sort of thing doesn’t happen here.
    ===============================================
    Margaret, my questions to you would be ……. does this site ban people with a different viewpoint?

    Does this site censor posts that do not agree with the (admittedly) skeptical viewpoint?

    …and finally does this site EDIT the posts of people posting contarian viewpoints to it’s (admittedly) skeptical bent? (this one is the worst of the lot IMHO)

    TR

  91. Everything the AMS leadership does makes me glad I dropped my membership and journal subscriptions about four years ago, after being a member for around twenty. Shepherd’s behavior here only validates that choice further.

    Eventually the AMS leadership and membership will consist only of those rent-seekers wholly dependent on the continued fueling of the CAGW funding train as they drive the rest off.

  92. CodeTech says:
    June 9, 2013 at 4:33 am
    OssQss:

    Thanks, sorta, for posting the link to James Burke. If you follow it, you’ll find all of his Connections shows and other programs, posted by him. I’m watching them now.

    Sadly, James Burke, who taught me via these programs to understand connections and the importance of history in science, is a vocal AGW believer. If only someone would make a “Connections” show explaining how this all began and where it is today
    ————————————————————————————

    …—…

    Exactly!

    Another victim of political “not”science once again!

    You got it >

  93. @Jay says:
    “Remember that it was politics that spawned the science in the first place.. Convinced that modern society (Capitalism) is killing the planet they wrote the conclusion first and then went on to back fill this political movement in any way possible.. ”

    As I travel around the country and look at all of the construction, i.e. roads, developments, etc., I find myself wondering where all of it will end. I lament what is happening to the landscape, especially with the construction of wind and solar farms – the worst eyesores I think. It seems to me that the proposed remedies, i.e. population reduction, carbon control, returning to an idealized pastoral culture and so on, are worse than the disease.

    I also think that use of the “big lie” (as in CAGW) to leverage political solutions, then calling it “science” is absolutely wrong. Lies only beget more lies and ultimately the whole enterprise collapses in upon itself, just what is happening now. People like Mann never learned from history.

  94. “Question:

    Why did the USSR go along with, even encourage, Lysenko?”

    Because Lysenko said by forcing behavior in this generation, future generations would inherit that behavior. One of the key beliefs of the Marxist faith is that people can be perfected in all aspects, in the real world, if “society” is manipulated in such a way to force them to behave properly. Thus the “New Soviet Man” and the like.

    If genetics is not as malleable as Lysenko claimed, then it gets a lot harder to “perfect” humanity.

  95. Kohl says:

    June 8, 2013 at 1:46 pm
    ” And often, these things seem to come from the left-leaning side of politics, that is to say, the very people who we might look to for the defense of our freedom of expression and the exchange of ideas.”

    Hilarious! Excellent joke.

Comments are closed.