Elmer at Minnesotans for Global Warming writes in with this, so I’m passing it on:
Michael Mann the self proclaimed creator of the “Hockey Stick Chart” will be speaking at the Minneapolis Convention Center tomorrow afternoon. He will be discussing Climate Scientists in the Public Area: Who’s Got Our Backs?.
In honor of this historic visit there will be two chances to carry signs and welcome Dr. Mann to the Twin Cities.
What: Welcoming Committee Demonstration
Who: Concerned citizens, Minnesota Majority, Minnesota Free Market Institute, Minnesotans for Global Warming
When: Wednesday, October 12th, 1:00-2:00 PM with a follow-up demonstration from 5:00-6:00 PM
Where: Sidewalk, North Side of Minneapolis Convention Center
Contact: Dan McGrath, 612-605-3303 ext. 703
http://www.minnesotansforglobalwarming.com/m4gw/2011/10/michael-mann-is-coming-to-town.html
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Michael Mann is laughing at these guys…
He has tweeted pictures of the Deniers, all half a dozen of them…
Basically, this little ‘protest’ had helped Michael Mann characterise sceptics as stupid ‘Deniers’ that hassle him, in front of his peer group..
Here is a pic:
http://twitter.com/#!/MichaelEMann/status/124303561281646593/photo/1
FAIL!
REPLY: Those without Twitter accounts won’t be able to see the image, double FAIL. And I don’t recall anyone promising “massive”, so perhaps Mikey’s ego was bruised that more protestors weren’t there. – Anthony
I would have gone and reported back had I known. Notice the day of does not cut it.
Actually Anthony, I don’t have a twitter account and I can see it. Just click on the button which says display media. FAIL!
REPLY: Well then maybe the good Dr. Mann has blocked me from accessing, because it displays a security message.- Anthony
Here is a story by the local press
http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/s2326088.shtml
There wasn’t very many of us, but we did engage in some good discussions with people some were even on our side. The president of the Geological Society actually came out and thanked us for being there, I think he was being sarcastic.
I have a twitter account. I get the following message:
I didn’t know you could restrict content on Twitter in this way.
Here’s one:
http://twitter.com/#!/MichaelEMann/status/124303561281646593/photo/1/large
And here’s another:
http://twitter.com/#!/MichaelEMann/status/124304235750895616/photo/1/large
For some reason that first one just doesn’t want to link correctly, don’t know why…
Seems like WP is altering the link after I post it. Don’t know why…
I think he was laughing because there were so few, easy to paint them as ‘crazies’
He needs to be able to point to people as Deniers, do that he doesn’t have to dek with people like Judith curry, Robert muller, pielke, mcintyre, etc..
I just think tactics like placards on the outside of events like this are counterproductive.
Privately many scientists don’t seem have a great opinion of his hockey stick, as far as I can see..
Anti Mann placards, keep these thoughts private in my opinion
I think many of you understimate the level of scepticism in the GSA members. It’s not because they attend and listen to what he says that they necessarily agree with him. Similarly, it’s not because they are not outside picketing that they support him or his work. From my perspective, few are fooled by the arguments presented to justify his (and others’) transgressions and manipulations revealed in the Climategate emails. It’s fairly clear that he behavior was unethical (at best).
Many listen, see the hipocrisy in the victim stance that is taken by the author, and they move on without giving much more consideration to something they already understand to be a charade. End of story. To me that speaks more strongly than any protest or beligerant behaviour which draws attention away from Mann and reinforces his weak victim stance.
From a 15 yr GSA member.
Most geologists don’t accept the CAGW theory having been examining the climate record over a much longer time period than is usually the case. Indeed, it was geologists (real paleoclimatologists) who threws the monkey-wrench into the “hottest ever decade (century, millennium….)” nonsense – I guess the GSA folks running the show are the exceptions. Anyway we know whose got our Greenbacks.
Well,
http://www.geosociety.org/positions/position10.htm
I found these tidbits, scanning the other abstracts:
Discussion of the coming solar minimum:
http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2011AM/finalprogram/abstract_194371.htm
Sr/Ca Temperature proxy:
http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2011AM/finalprogram/abstract_196287.htm
Holocene storm frequency from a North Florida sinkhole:
http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2011AM/finalprogram/abstract_196857.htm
The LARISSA program:
http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2011AM/finalprogram/abstract_195272.htm
This session on extreme weather events:
http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2011AM/finalprogram/abstract_190757.htm
Included this offering from Trenberth blaming the Russian drought and Pakistan floods on AGW:
http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2011AM/finalprogram/abstract_192442.htm
Here’s a session on peatlands and climate change:
http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2011AM/finalprogram/session_28755.htm
The public policy session with Mann and the UCS presentations:
http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2011AM/finalprogram/session_29840.htm
That first link I posted is to a presentation by Don Easterbrook from the Dept. of Geology, Western Washington Univ., Bellingham, WA. The wordy title is:
CLIMATIC IMPLICATIONS OF THE IMPENDING GRAND SOLAR MINIMUM AND COOL PACIFIC DECADAL OSCILLATION: THE PAST IS THE KEY TO THE FUTURE–WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM RECURRING PAST CLIMATE CYCLES RECORDED BY GLACIAL FLUCTUATIONS, ICE CORES, SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURES, AND HISTORIC MEASUREMENTS.
The abstract is here:
http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2011AM/finalprogram/abstract_194371.htm
In hunting around for more information, I “Googled” Dr. Easterbrook. Interstingly, the first link I found was to this response
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Response_to_GSA_position_statement.pdf
to the GSA position on climate change, cited by Rattus in the preceding post.
It’s my impression that Dr Easterbrook’s position is closer to mainstream geologic thinking than the GSA’s position. IMO, the GSA position is more of a political statement than a scientific one.