You have to wonder, has Dr. Mann decided to pull a CYA in the face of Climategate, or is he just not cognizant of how ridiculous his statement is in the context of his past behavior?
Since “Climategate” Dr. Michael Mann has been on a nonstop media blitz. It seems he’s given dozens if not hundreds of interviews since the story broke on November 19th. It seem obvious that he’ll talk to anyone in an effort to get his point across. Up until this one interview, the message has been consistent with much of what he’s said and done in the past. That is, until this zinger.
In an interview given to The Morning Call, Dr. Mann was able to alienate both sides of the debate with a single sentence:
“I would call them contrarians or, frankly in some cases, climate change deniers,” he said. “I’m a skeptic. When I see a scientific claim being made, I want to see it subject to scrutiny and validation.”
Climatician, heal thyself. Start with a mirror.
Yet, while saying things like:
“I wish in retrospect I had told him, ‘Hey, you shouldn’t even be thinking about this,’” [reference to deleting emails]
… when his own work is subject to “scrutiny”, he has to resort to FTP data folders labeled “censored“. Look at what happens when that Mann “censored” data is used.
Here’s the complete interview transcript.
You know, The Daily Call only has one side of the story. They really should interview Steve McIntyre or Ross McKittrick next. Their contact page is helpful for such requests.
Mann’s computer ‘algore’ithm produced a hockey stick shape 90% of the time when random numbers were used as input. I don’t understand how he expects his work to withstand any level of scrutiny at all.
Sue them all.
When Mann did his first post-Climategate interviews, he was hinting that other climate scientists should step up to the plate and defend him (even though he threw Phil Jones under the bus as fast he could in all those first interviews).
Well, no one else has stepped up to defend him (which is why he has continued to give these interviews to everyone who asks). I wonder why he has no supporters left.
Smokey, you are the man! ( not mann, hehe )
This post FORCED me to have a look at “Hide the decline” again.
It is my response to Herr Mann;
Its such a happy and joyful song!
” “I’m a skeptic. When I see a scientific claim being made, I want to see it subject to scrutiny and validation.”
translation:
I’m a skeptic, and I believe in man made weather change, so it must be true.
If I was Irish I would do that long Irish laugh and thanks a million times.
Eh is he really saying
‘I’m a skeptic (of actual science). When I see a scientific claim being made, I want to see it subject to scrutiny and validation…(because if it’s not climate science and doesn’t follow the rules it’s not science at all)
I know you’re just kidding around Mike. Cheeky Monkey
Ah well, I will arise and go now, and go to Innisfree…
Well the whitewashing process isn’t limited to Dr Mann, and his maybe misgivings.
The latest issue of Scientific American has a full page Editorial by the Editor in Chief of SA, who embarks on a rambling dissertation trying to bolster the AGW doctrine.
She starts by asserting (without proof) that 1000 e-mails were stolen from the University of East Anglia CRU; and made public. I’m sure SA will carry an article outlining the dastardly deed in all its Gorey details. Well maybe it will be the 50 years ago curiosity item in their 2060 April edition.(if there is one; to steal a comment from Winston Churchill (to George Bernard Shaw)).
I’d still like to see even the faintest glimmer of a suggestion that indicates theft. (well nothing was actually taken was it ?)
Madam editor goes on to whine about the collapse of Copenhagen; in its failure to enforce draconian measures of no apparent climate consequence on a crumbling economic condition.
Of course there was no mention of such Jewels of wisdom such as Smokey posts above 10:50:00 ; nor of the incriminating code sections and comment that reveal how the conspirators “hide the decline”.
She goes on to mutter something about “the preponderance of the evidence”.
A wonderful principle for the civil courtroom; but never accepted for the Criminal case; nor for that matter, for the scientific case.
Well SA, far greater minds than mine have offerend that it takes only a single no vote to trump a near infinity of yes votes in the search for scientific truth.
Science does not advance by concensus; nor by the preponderance of the “evidence”; and specially when the evidence is mostly made up by computers; and not matched by observations in Gaia’s laboratory.
As if her editorial pages are not enough room for the propaganda that this once proud magazine has become a purveyor of; there are some three major articles pushing the same line. Has anyone ever seen a contrarian article published in SA. There certainly are credible scientists or scientific teams, who can present cogent science that is contrary to the party line of the green left. They don’t try to whitewash the role played by rare GHG constituents of the atmosphere; nor do they try to promote them as the harbingers of doom.
Scientists of the future who stumble across current papers about “Climate science” will have no trouble at all dating the publication dates of their rare finds; any 8th grade high school science student could do it.
It is an axiom of “climate science” that observed “trends” in past climate are bipolar; sometimes exhibiting an upward trend, and sometimes displaying a downward trend; sooner or later it seems to change.
Contrast this with the future trends predicted; excuse me; projected by the authors, that invariably show a monotonic future. Upwards, in the case of atmospheric CO2 and earth mean surface or lower tropospheric temperatures, or sea level; or perhaps downward in the case of Arctic Ocean ice extent, and thickness.
So the publication date stands out like a sore thumb between the bipolar disorder of the past and the monotonic future of doomsday.
One area where one may safely predict a monotonic downward trend, despite a rising global population; might be the subscription volume of that once great Journal; Scientific American.
That trend will continue with the next lapse of my personal subscription; which goes back maybe 40 years or more.
“Once a Mann, always a Mann.”
But never a Mensch!
A good Mann is hard to find….
Tell me this ain’t so:
http://www.thefoxnation.com/global-warming/2010/03/29/global-warming-activist-freezes-death-antarctica
Global Warming Activist Freezes to Death in Antarctica
Famed global warming activist James Schneider and a journalist friend were both found frozen to death on Saturday, about 90 miles from South Pole Station, by the pilot of a ski plane practicing emergency evacuation procedures.
“I couldn’t believe what I was seeing”, recounted the pilot, Jimmy Dolittle. “There were two snowmobiles with cargo sleds, a tent, and a bright orange rope that had been laid out on the ice, forming the words, ‘HELP-COLD’.”
REPLY: This is a hoax article, everybody should ignore it. – Anthony
“This is the largest scientific hoax of all time and the media remains asleep.”
The media is not asleep, it is on guard… lest the truth be given a whisper of a chance to be heard.
Dr Michael Mann, your next career move into futurology has good foundations…
OK, so I know what “man up” means aand what “man down” means and the “man-o-warmist” crack was hilarious. I even know what a “stick man” and I had thought that a “hockey stick mann” would just be a mann who makes hockey sticks. Turns out that is exactly right.
But he doesn’t make real hockey sticks he only makes drawings that REPRESENT hockey sticks. They are virtual hockey sticks. They aren’t real and they can’t hurt you. Unless you print them and then you can get a paper cut. But nothing serious.
For what ever reason though, he seems to have been paid in electronic funds which are also virtual, but unlike hockey stick graphs, can be exchanged for something tangible.
When you can start with something that does not exist, and exchange it for something that does, you have invented magic so advanced that it is indistinguishable from science.
The Morning Call reporter did interview Steve McIntyre a few months ago.
REPLY: This is a hoax article, everybody should ignore it. – Anthony
Did the “pilot, Jimmy Doolittle” part sound a bit fishy to you?
REPLY: I never got to that part, I started looking to see if it was on other news sources today, it wasn’t, which is a sure sign of a hoax. I suspect there will be a number of April fools type jokes for the next few days. – A
FoxNation printed the story from EcoEnquirer, a parody/satire website. Their disclaimer. I wish Fox Nation would check this stuff out more. Still…funny
EcoEnquirer’s
DISCLAIMER
All content on this site, being a mixture of parody, satire, and lame humor, is for entertainment purposes only. If any content is found to be offensive or objectionable in any way, please accept our apologies… but we also suggest that you get a life.
Sean Peake (08:19:49) :
“I am not a crook.”
I did not have sex with that stick!
“When I see a scientific claim being made, I want to see it subject to scrutiny and validation.”
Funny. Seriously funny.
And Bernie Madoff demanded rigorous audits.
But, in the spirit of Bill Clinton’s point that it all depends on what your definition of “is” is, note that Mann is referring to a “scientific claim.” Since none of his claims actually were scientific, they did not require and scrutiny or validation.
Paul S (12:19:58) wrote:
“Dr Michael Mann, your next career move into futurology has good foundations…”
Yes, of course. Why shouldn’t reading tree rings be just as valid as reading tea leaves?
“davidmhoffer (12:20:04) :
[…]
When you can start with something that does not exist, and exchange it for something that does, you have invented magic so advanced that it is indistinguishable from science.”
Mann’s magic is distinguishable from science so it’s not sufficiently advanced.
BTW, some people called Dr. Mann “Herr Mann”… it occurs to me that Hansen, Schmidt and Mann are all familiar german surnames (the Hansen’s mostly in Hamburg as Hamburg was a founding city of the Hanse). I don’t think they’re a german fifth column. Probably they are just genetically predisposed to be attracted by disaster scenarios.
Maybe they could set aside April 1 as Global Warming Day. How appropriate!
Mann-fred Mann and the Warming Earth Band!
Blinded by the Lies! and The Mighty Quinn
(My apologies to Bob Dylan)
Everybody’s building ships and boats
Some are building monuments,
others jotting down notes
Everybody’s in despair, every girl and boy,
But when Gore the Eskimo gets here,
Everybody’s gonna jump for joy.
Come on without
Come on within
You’ll not see nothing like the Mighty Gore
I like to go just like the rest,
I like my sugar sweet
But jumping queues and making haste just ain’t my cup of meat
Everybody’s beneath the trees
feeding pidgeons on a limb
But when Gore the Eskimo gets here,
all the pidgeons gonna run to him.
Come all without
Come all within
You’ll not see nothing like the Mighty Gore
Come all without
Come all within
You’ll not see nothing like the Mighty Gore
Let me do what I wanna do,
I can’t decide ’em all
Just tell me where to put ’em
and I’ll tell you who to call
Nobody can get no sleep
there’s someone on everyone’s toes
But when Gore the Eskimo gets here,
everybody’s gonna wanna doze
Come all without(just singin a song)
Come all within(everybody)
You’ll not see nothing like the Mighty Gore(I wanna hear you sing!)
Come all without
Come all within (here he comes now)
You’ll not see nothing like the Mighty Gore (let’s come on and sing)
Come all without (just singin a song)
Come all within (everybody)
You’ll not see nothing like the Mighty Gore
Come all without
Come all within
You’ll not see nothing like the Mighty Gore
Here’s one that’s not a hoax!!!
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/03/29/achtung-germans-giving-global-warming/
Some of the drivel being put on the accuweather “global warming ” site is really funny!
“Ice Sheet Loss Spreading up the Greenland Coast” are they losing the plot? there posting seem to be getting more and more ridiculous…
The broadly spread reality, is that only MM et al get favorably presented in MSM, and honest objectivity is not a basic componant of the moral compass of too many of us on any side of any issue. MM can do quite well preaching to the choir. Our side is growing, though we are not immune from that same flaw. The caliber of comments on most threads on WUWT is generally several orders of magnitude above just about any other site I frequent.