Michael Mann's new book is out

Negative (i.e. 1 star) reviews by the following people have been deleted:
59 of 86 A. Blue
42 of 71 R. Hooper
35 of 62 Chris B
17 of 32 Peter
The warmists are adding new reviews and getting other warmists to quickly voting for them, to get those at the top (Most Helpful First) order. So if 3 of 4 people like a review, it will be at the top.

Wherethereishope says:
February 8, 2012 at 9:09 pm
When Tony Blair, UK ex PM, put his autobiography on sale. A lot of people were moving it from the Biography section in the shops and putting it under “crime” or “fantasy”. Where should this one go?
Abnormal Psychology?

From Anthony Watts on February 8, 2012 at 9:08 pm:

My first takeaway impression is that Dr. Mann can do no wrong, which is a self image bolstered by an ego so large that surely the State Department of Transportation has to put orange road cones out ahead of him when he travels.

Here in Pennsylvania? Flashing lights on the hauling vehicle, large black-on-yellow signs front and back proclaiming “WIDE LOAD”, with Certified Escort Vehicles (at least one in front) having the same. For “smaller” loads like a prefab home that arguably occupies just over one lane, they stick to a lane and other vehicles slip around them in the passing lane. If larger then the load occupies two lanes and there are more escort vehicles to keep everyone going in that direction away. If the entire road is only two lanes wide and going both ways, then the State Troopers get involved and the cones come out. They also get involved with extra-long loads like concrete bridge beams that need extra room to turn corners.
Like when in nearby Danville in 2009 a tractor-trailer hauling a 150-ft 100-ton wind turbine tower chunk to West Virginia went to make the turn onto a bridge over the Susquehanna River, an axle broke, and it sat there waiting for parts ordered from Alabama to fix it.
http://dailyitem.com/0100_news/x546125233/Grounded-load-in-Danville-waits-for-parts

When the back of the trailer hit a tree and a curb on Front Street on Monday while trying to turn onto the Danville-Riverside bridge, a tire blew and the axle was damaged.
The rig and base sat there, resulting in the bridge being closed for six hours before the base and trailer could be lifted and slid.
Because of damage to the trailer, it couldn’t be moved, so the crane that lifted it was reactivated to move the trailer and base farther back on Front Street so the bridge could be reopened at 5:45 p.m. Monday.
The big load was the second to go through Danville. The first made it across the bridge, but its engine reportedly blew later Monday at All Saints Cemetery in the Elysburg area. The trailer also was reported to have cracked. That base was the same size as the one remaining in Danville.
The wide loads began their trip in Toronto, Canada.

For some reason people think wind turbines are only both funny and annoying after they’re erected and often not running. Go figure.
Those chunks are that heavy, that hard to move, and clearly being moved with equipment that’s marginal for the task. So of course the “civic-minded” people are grousing about road damage from too-heavy natural gas drilling and fracking equipment while giving those turbine chunks a free pass. Oh well, something else to blame Mann and his fellow still-unindicted co-conspirators for bringing about. 😉

I copied a few of Amazon policies for anyone who was affected. To be deleted, one must have been reported under “Report Abuse”. See the link for full details. I suggest that Mann’s book violates the Amazon Policy on many counts. On that basis, it should be pulled from being sold.
Amazon Customer Discussions
http://www.amazon.com/gp/forum/content/db-guidelines.html
What shouldn’t I post?
Behave as if you were a guest at a friend’s dinner party. Please treat the Amazon.com community with respect. Do not post:
• Profane or obscene, inflammatory or spiteful comments
• Messages that abuse, denigrate or threaten others
• Text or articles written by someone else, even with attribution for the author, except for brief quotations from a book, article or other product related to the discussion
• Any personal information about children under 13
• Descriptions that intrude on the privacy of another person, including revealing personally identifiable information such as their name or address
• Text that promotes illegal or immoral conduct
• Repeated posts that make the same point excessively
• Repeated unwelcome messages that harass or embarrass other customers or participants
• Repeated posts that promote an item in the Amazon.com catalog
• Any form of “spam,” including advertisements, contests, or other solicitations for other websites or companies; or any URL link that includes a “referrer” tag or affiliate code.
Do not impersonate another person, including an Amazon.com employee.
We recommend that you do not post your phone number or e-mail address.
How do I edit or delete my post?
Click “Edit” on any message that you have posted. (You need to be signed in with the same account you used to write the post.) You can then change the text or delete the post.
What if I find an inappropriate post, or one that detracts from the discussion?
If you find a post that you feel is obscene, threatening, pornographic, another person’s words, or otherwise violates Amazon.com’s guidelines outlined here or in the Conditions of Use, please click “Report abuse” and submit the report.
If you think that a post just doesn’t help further the discussion, vote “No” on the right edge of the post. On the other hand, if you believe that a post, whether you agree with it or not, contributes well to a constructive conversation, you can vote “Yes” on the right edge of the post. When the customers voting on a post collectively don’t think it adds to the discussion, the post may be hidden by default. You can still view these posts by clicking “Show post anyway.”
What do I do if my message was deleted?
We regularly investigate messages that have been reported to Amazon.com as violating our guidelines. If you feel your message was removed inappropriately, contact us.

http://holocene.meteo.psu.edu/Mann/books/hockeystick/index.php

The Hockey Stick became a central icon in the “climate wars,” and well-funded science deniers immediately attacked the chart and the scientists responsible for it. Yet the controversy has had little to do with the depicted temperature rise and much more with the perceived threat the graph posed to those who oppose governmental regulation and other restraints to protect our environment and planet. (…) Throughout, Mann reveals the role of science deniers, abetted by an uninformed media, in once again diverting attention away from one of the central scientific and policy issues of our time.

Kevin Trenberth advocates reversing the climate ‘null hypothesis’. Now Michael Mann tries to show who is the real Big Dog of Climate Science™, by inverting reality itself!

Report web page issues to: smiller at psu dot edu

Issues like offensive language and unsubstantiated allegations being promulgated on a state-funded website? Maybe Governor Tom Corbett should cut Penn State’s funding even further, since apparently good old PSU is happy enough with Mann’s grant money that they’ll willingly put up such dreck without worrying about financial shortfalls from alienating donors and losing funding due to violating any relevant laws and regulations.
For the benefit of fellow Pennsylvania residents, even people passing through who’ve paid PA sales tax, smiller@psu.edu will hopefully be an easy-to-click link (provided the moderators don’t snip it, which they have the right to do) for voicing your complaints about the abuse of your tax money.

the cover of Mann’s book looks like it was put together by a 10 your old who has just learnt to use Windows Paint – I am sorry but it looks sooo tacky and unprofessional versus the sleek cover of Harold Amblars book – no wonder they cant sell the science to the public!

An early 5 star review by Rob Honeycutt states:
“In fact it was Mann himself who coined the term AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation)…”
According to Wiki (maybe not an infallible source) “The Atlantic multidecadal oscillation (AMO) was identified by Schlesinger and Ramankutty in 1994.” and refers to Schlesinger, M.E. and Navin Ramankutty (1994): An oscillation in the global climate system of period 65-70 years. Nature, 367, Issue 6465, pp. 723-726, DOI: 10.1038/367723a0. NCAR also refers to the 1994 Schlesinger et al paper, though (http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/catalog/climind/AMO.html).
Is this an attempt to give more credence to Mann than he is entitled to? If not, what is the value of the reviewers remarks if he is making basic attribution errors like this.

From John Trigge on February 9, 2012 at 12:42 am:

An early 5 star review by Rob Honeycutt states:
“In fact it was Mann himself who coined the term AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation)…”
(…)
Is this an attempt to give more credence to Mann than he is entitled to? If not, what is the value of the reviewers remarks if he is making basic attribution errors like this.

That’s a very carefully worded attribution. I noticed the Wikipedia entry before when a certain common sewer rat claimed Mann was a co-author of the paper that “found” the AMO. Bill Illis later clarified the issue:

Regarding Mann and naming the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. He only claims he came up with the name for it in 2000 in an interview he gave to Richard Kerr (the editor of Nature at the time). Schlesinger and Ramankutty did not name it in their 1994 paper.
Richard Kerr also wrote an editorial about the Oscillation in Nature in 2000 which coincided with Mann and Delworth’s paper which outlined the oscillation pattern over a few centuries. An interview Kerr had with Mann was published in a few newspapers and that is where the name AMO first came up.

As stated in the mentioned book review, “in fact” is a bit of stretch. At least merely saying he coined the term, that he put a name on something someone else had found but didn’t bother to name, is better than the blatant falsehood of outright stating he was a co-discoverer of the AMO. (Although why it wasn’t simply named the Atlantic Decadal Oscillation, the natural complementary term to the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, would be interesting to know.)

rossbrisbane:
Unlike the leftist mind-locked drones you seem to be used to dealing with, we independent thinkers don’t take marching orders from anyone.
Mr. Watts alerted us to the presence of this disgusting, loathsome man’s newest smear campaign against “deniers” and showcase of self-aggrandizing fluff, and a few of us apparently wandered over and vented a bit, in a place that the perpetrator is likely to actually look.
Anyone who steps into the limelight had better be able to handle both cheers AND boos. And the occasional hiss, overripe produce and even – GASP – the Hook.
Over time, I’m sure that the Amazon review section will represent the same overwhelming dismissal and mocking of AGW alarmism that pretty much every unedited news item comment section on the same topic now displays.
The fact is, the “Science” of AGW only works if you cook data, falsify observation, ignore what is outside your own window, conjure up “projections” in a model, and ignore history. Contrary to Mann et al’s belief, the average person is more than capable of seeing through the cheap tawdry charade.

I have just written a review and I hope they print it because I slated it. Amazon did not ask if I had read it which seemed a little strange but there you are. It seems anyone can review it so go ahead and add another slating.