Josh on Mann's Jurassic Moment

Moviegoing readers of WUWT probably remember this famous moment from a famous film based on a Michel Crichton book. While “State of Fear” might come to mind first, it’s actually one of the 50 Greatest Jurassic Park Moments.

Josh writes:

So why has Michael Mann’s new book got such great PR. My hunch is that this might be a media set up – hype the thing and wait for nature to take its course. Sit back and enjoy the show?

Bishop Hill writes:

I wonder if Columbia University Press is paying for this PR or whether there’s somebody else involved?

Whoever is behind it, the message doesn’t seem to be getting through. Despite clocking up nearly 100 Amazon reviews, the book is currently around 3500 on the Amazon chart (9500 in the UK). Is this a sign of the changed times or is it just that the market for climate books is dead?

Josh was inspired to capture this situation in paleo-vision:

Give Josh some tipjar love at

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 6, 2012 11:26 am

Can we have that as a T-shirt?

March 6, 2012 11:28 am

Awesome! Just AWESOME!

John Morgensen
March 6, 2012 11:36 am

I see that Mann’s book is #3581 under Product Details at Amazon, but is there a way to get Amazon to display the whole list?

March 6, 2012 11:48 am

Don’t cry for Mr. Mann !!!
I’m sure that the IPCC will buy as many as they can (with taxpayer money) and give them away !!!
(or perhaps many colleges and universities)

Interstellar Bill
March 6, 2012 11:51 am

Mann is the lawyer in the ‘Jurassic Park’ outhouse, blown over by global colding.

March 6, 2012 11:57 am


March 6, 2012 11:58 am

Did you hear that? What was that?

March 6, 2012 12:09 pm

A couple out of the warmist handbook.
What the public dosnt know, im not gonna tell em.
Dont bother me with the facts, my minds made up.
If you cant attack the data attack the people.
Do your research by proclamation, investigation is too much trouble.
Oh mann….

March 6, 2012 12:14 pm

I wonder, is there an idea behind the books looking like the romanian flag instead of say the german flag? o_•

March 6, 2012 12:18 pm

Mann-made global whining……..

March 6, 2012 12:39 pm

There’s hope. Not in tree ring based hockey sticks, but comic book bears.
The Berenstain Bears and the Truth
Ranked #1009
Mann’s trumped by comic book bears who learn a lesson in telling the truth.
How poetic. Simply poetic.

March 6, 2012 1:07 pm

In the words of the TRex that ate the lawyer in Jurrasic Park…. “Chomp”

Bob Diaz
March 6, 2012 1:17 pm

OK Josh, how do you keep coming up with so many funny cartoons?
LOL, I love it!!!

March 6, 2012 1:24 pm

Hockey stick
Related Searches: greatest hoax

J. Felton
March 6, 2012 1:53 pm

*In his best Ian Malcolm impression*
“I’ll tell you what you’ve done. You’ve patented it, packaged it, slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now you’re selling it.”

March 6, 2012 1:59 pm

😀 Nice one Josh. Nicely dramatic.

March 6, 2012 2:00 pm

Josh, that’s great!
Charles: OMG, Mann is a UFO skeptic.
See a little down the page. Still, the behaviour to distort the truth fits as we’ve recently seen.

March 6, 2012 2:40 pm

I’m liking the look of that goat…can I get fries with that?

Michael J. Bentley
March 6, 2012 2:42 pm

OK, Darn it, I’m going to have to watch the whole schabang this evening and it’s your fault!
A great cast and a wonderful yarn with enough truth to be believable, unlike the hockey stick.
Loved Jeff Golblum as the eccentric “Chaostition”.
But the best line was by a bit player:
When the programmer was restarting the computers after the sabotage,
“Everybody hold on to your butts.”
S/B used for every new climate model run!
Now, where’d I put that popcorn?

Chris B
March 6, 2012 3:00 pm

Josh did you mean tethered, or tenured.
Mann”s Pennsylvanian tenure postdates his “Jurrasic” moment.
Fraud imitating life. LOL

March 6, 2012 3:40 pm

From Bishop Hill comments.
“I’m not that keen on science fiction books.”
Mar 6, 2012 at 11:27 AM | Unregistered CommenterMac

March 6, 2012 3:41 pm

in a recent Guardian Q&A, Michael Mann was asked: “Given that the term “denier” has obvious holocaust denial connotations, do you think that your use of that word is:
1. unacceptable for a scientist to use
2. one that could incite certain elements to violence against people who question the concensus
Or do you consider it a reasonable term?”
his response:
27 Feb: Guardian: Live Q&A: Climate scientist Michael Mann on the ‘hockey stick’ controversy
MM: Frankly, I think those who complain about this are often just producing crocodiles tears. As someone who lost relatives to the religious persecution of the jewish people, I would be as sensitive to anyone if I really though the use of the term has anything whatsoever do do with the holocaust. I find that argument quite disingenuous if not downright dishonest. For those who are denying mainstream science, the logical thing to call them is “deniers”. they are certainly not “skeptics” and even “contrarian” doesn’t always fit the bill. Given that some of the fiercest of our detractors have proudly declared themselves deniers (one such individual even wrote a book “The Deniers”) I find that this argument has no currency at all. I suspect its often used as a somewhat disingenuous ploy to get journalists and other commentators to grant the highly undeserved term of “skeptic” to those who are nothing of the sort
“denier” appears a dozen times on this Guardian page, in questions, answers and comments below. if his book is as repetitive (aka propagandist), it will only be of interest to CAGW alarmists.

James Sexton
March 6, 2012 3:51 pm

Nice one Josh….. you keep getting better and better!

March 6, 2012 4:24 pm

Now that is just plain evil, but oh, so very funny.

March 6, 2012 4:42 pm

I love it!!! I want a T-Shirt, too.
I’m serious!

Phil R
March 6, 2012 5:03 pm

I wouldn’t give Mann the time of day, much less a dollar for his book. He’s already taken enough of my taxes, but this could be one coffee mug that I would love to take to work.

March 6, 2012 6:39 pm

Matthew W says:
March 6, 2012 at 11:48 am
“Don’t cry for Mr. Mann !!!
I’m sure that the IPCC will buy as many as they can (with taxpayer money) and give them away !!!
(or perhaps many colleges and universities)”
At least here in Europe, where there are no Super-PACs, and strict limits on political donations, one way of stuffing the pockets of your favorite politician is to buy a few truckloads of his latest book. The trucks head directly for the next paper recycling facility and the books are turned into raw material again; money changes hands and your politician has a bestseller.
Also helps to drive up the recycling quota, making us look greener.

Andrejs Vanags
March 6, 2012 6:52 pm

I think ‘The Air Vent’ had a post on how the hockey stick was a characteristic signature of fitting random noise to temperature. It is true, I went ahead an took a few hundred series of gaussian random numbers, integrated them to create red or brown noise, each run uncorrelated to the other, called them tree ring series, fitted the last 1/10 or so to an upwards slope (simulating a temperature trend), did a weighted average of the runs where the runs with the best fit where given the highest weight, averaged them together, and got a hockey stick, every time.
The ‘hockey stick’ has a stick which is flat, constant, this is because all the uncorrelated random walk noise averages to a constant value, and has a blade, for those selection or runs that were the best fit to the chosen slope, and since given a larger weight, show up. The lack of ‘detail’ or structure in the stick part is a dead away one is using uncorrelated random noise data. In other words tree ring are lousy indicators of temperature
It proved to me that if anything has a hockey stick shape it means that the thing you are tying to fit to (in this case tree rings to temperature) is uncorrelated. With so many smart people around, and a test so easily reproducible I am amazed no one has yelled ‘the Emperor has no clothes’ and relegated the whole ‘hockey stick’ into the dustbin of history (well, the Air Vent did, just very few people listened)

Jeff Alberts
March 6, 2012 7:43 pm

What I remember most about JP is Malcom’s bogus demonstration of chaos theory, and preaching the “butterfly effect”.

Jim G
March 6, 2012 9:40 pm

“T-rex doesn’t want to be fed; he wants to hunt. You can’t just suppress sixty-five million years of gut instinct.”

kadaka (KD Knoebel)
March 6, 2012 10:17 pm

The tethered goat,
the tenured goatee,
same difference.
Could have put a red shirt on him, it’s traditional.
In other news, I heard Terra Nova on FOX got canceled.

The series is initially set in 2149, a time when overpopulation and declining air quality worldwide threatens all life on Earth. After scientists discover a rift in spacetime, they begin sending people in a series of “pilgrimages” 85 million years into Earth’s Cretaceous past, to a different “time stream”.

Overpopulation? Air quality? Anyone here ever watch the show, did they bother to toss in catastrophic global warming as well? I guess global alarmism of any sort just isn’t selling these days, and running away from dinosaurs just doesn’t hold attention too long. Well, thanks to Josh, Mann won’t be thinking about it for too long…

March 6, 2012 10:33 pm

Book Review:
“The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines ”
by Michael “Piltdown” Mann
As has become the accepted practice when reviewing books about the politics and science of global warming, I did not bother to read the book.
One of the best measures of the quality of a scientific hypothesis is if it can be used to correctly predict the future – in this instance the magnitude of global warming.
The IPCC and its global warming minions predicted dangerous runaway global warming would be clearly evident by now, and yet there has been no net global warming for about a decade. Oops!
The warmists also said that weather would become “wilder”, such that extreme weather events would occur more frequently. This has not happened either. Oops again!.
The problem with books written by global warming alarmists is their lack of any credible predictive track record. Every very-scary prediction by global warming alarmists has failed to materialize. The warmists have a perfect-track record – of being dead wrong!
So if you want to waste your money AND your time, then buy this book and read it!
If you want to destroy your scientific credibility, repeat its false conclusions to your friends and pretend you know what you are talking about.
Finally, if you want to destroy your net worth, go buy some beachfront on the Arctic Ocean, in anticipation of the day when your land will become prime recreational real estate, aka “Malibu North”, and ask your friends to co-invest with you.

March 7, 2012 5:53 am

Interstellar Bill [March 6, 2012 at 11:51 am] says:
“Mann is the lawyer in the ‘Jurassic Park’ outhouse, blown over by global colding.”

ROTFLMAO! I vote for the lawyer in the outhouse scene as well. Please Josh, make it so.

March 7, 2012 6:09 am

DirkH says:
March 6, 2012 at 6:39 pm
Exactly !!!
Pretty sure Ted Kennedy had a similar book deal !!

March 7, 2012 6:22 am

Blade, nice clip. I had forgotten that part. I also like ‘The Tenured Goatee’. What an inspiration you lot are!

March 7, 2012 11:10 am

Matthew W says: March 7, 2012 at 6:09 am
“Pretty sure Ted Kennedy had a similar book deal !”
C’mon Matthew – please don’t knock Ted Kennedy – he was a great actor.
I particularly liked his portrayal of Jabba the Hutt in Star Wars.
Not to mention his convincing portrayal as the lifeguard in “The Chappaquiddick Incident”.

March 8, 2012 12:14 pm

MrX says:
March 6, 2012 at 2:00 pm
Josh, that’s great!
Charles: OMG, Mann is a UFO skeptic.
See a little down the page. Still, the behaviour to distort the truth fits as we’ve recently seen.
Way OT, but I see CAGW fanatics and ET fanatics as two peas in a pod–neither is able to see through the nonsense. Evolution and ET are hardly compatible. In a billion years of multicellular evolution we have no evidence of outside genetic interference–everything is home grown. Even the humans are easily classified among the apes, mammals, chordates, etc.–no colonists as far as we can tell–all home grown.
So without a single good picture or credible witness to the contrary, we are asked to believe that outsiders have lately taken up residence without going through customs. They left us alone for billions of years, but suddenly show up only a few centuries after we start believing the sky is big and full of worlds. (Oh, and of course Ezekiel is now interpreted as evidence, as are the Nasca Lines and so on.)
Well neither is this nonsense compatible with relativistic physics–these visitors obviously travel faster than light. But their evil empire apparently doesn’t expand faster than the universe, or it would be too late already. They must be nice chaps, willing to live and let live. Lucky for us.
PS, I can’t find any mention of that idiot Mann in MrX’s link, but I sure like Bishop Hill’s book review. That’s good science. And if Mann is a UFO skeptic then there’s hope for him yet.

March 15, 2012 6:36 pm

Did Dr. Mann happen to mention in his book about how mean his “Team” was about his hockey stick?
3373.txt: Raymond Bradley: “ Furthermore, the model output is very much determined by the time series of forcing that is selected, and the model sensitivity which essentially scales the range. Mike only likes these because they seem to match his idea of what went on in the last millennium, whereas he would savage them if they did not. Also–& I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year “reconstruction”. ” This refers to a 2003 paper “Global surface temperatures over the past two millennia” by Mann and Jones, that shows ‘hockey stick’ temperature graphs and was used by the IPCC in its 2007 report.
0435.txt: Ed Cook, on the same Mann & Jones paper: “ I am afraid the Mike and Phil are too personally invested in things now (i.e. the 2003 GRL paper that is probably the worst paper Phil has ever been involved in – Bradley hates it as well), ”
1527.txt: Dendrochronologist Rob Wilson writes: “ There has been criticism by Macintyre of Mann’s sole reliance on RE, and I am now starting to believe the accusations. ”
4241.txt: Rob Wilson again: “ The whole Macintyre issue got me thinking…I first generated 1000 random time-series in Excel … The reconstructions clearly show a ‘hockey-stick’ trend. I guess this is precisely the phenomenon that Macintyre has been going on about. ”
4369.txt: Tim Osborn says “ This completely removes most of Mike’s arguments… ” and Ed Cook replies “I am afraid that Mike is defending something that increasingly can not be defended. He is investing too much personal stuff in this and not letting the science move ahead.”
4758.txt: Tim Osborn: “ Because how can we be critical of Crowley for throwing out 40-years in the middle of his calibration, when we’re throwing out all post-1960 data ‘cos the MXD has a non-temperature signal in it, and also all pre-1881 or pre-1871 data ‘cos the temperature data may have a non-temperature signal in it! “
2346.txt: Osborn: “ Also, we set all post-1960 values to missing in the MXD data set (due to decline), and the method will infill these, estimating them from the real temperatures – another way of “correcting” for the decline, though may be
not defensible! ”
2009.txt: Keith Briffa: “ I find myself in the strange position of being very skeptical of the quality of all present reconstructions, yet sounding like a pro greenhouse zealot here! ”
3994.txt: John Mitchell (Met Office) commenting on draft IPCC report: “ Is the PCA approach robust? Are the results statistically significant? It seems to me that in the case of MBH the answer in each is no. ”
1104.txt: Heinz Wanner: “ I was a reviewer of the IPCC-TAR report 2001. In my review which I can not find again in its
precise wording I critcized the fact that the whole Mann hockeytick is being printed in its full length in the IPCC-TAR report. In 1999 I made the following comments:
1. The spatial, temporal (tree-ring data in the midlatitudes mainly contain “summer information”) and spectral coverage and behaviour of the data is questionable, mainly before 1500-1600 AD.
2. It is in my opinion not appropriate already to make statements for the southern hemisphere and for the period prior to 1500 AD.
My review was classified “unsignificant” ”
0497.txt: Jones to Mann in 1999: “ Keith didn’t mention in his Science piece but both of us think that you’re on very dodgy ground with this long-term decline in temperatures on the 1000 year timescale. What the real world has done over the last 6000 years and what it ought to have done given our understandding of Milankovic forcing are two very different things. ”
0562.txt: Simon Tett (Met Office), discussing revising a paper: “ No justification for regional reconstructions rather than what Mann et al did (I don’t think we can say we didn’t do Mann et al because we think it is crap!) ”.
2383.txt: Tim Barnett in 2004: “ maybe someone(s) ought to have another look at Mann’s paper. His statistics were suspect as i remember… ”
1656.txt: Douglas Maraun (UEA): “ I think, that “our” reaction on the errors found in Mike Mann’s work were not
especially honest. ”
4005.txt: Osborn: “ Also we have applied a completely artificial adjustment to the data after 1960, so they look closer to observed temperatures than the tree-ring data actually were ”
4133.txt: David Rind (NASA GISS): “ what Mike Mann continually fails to understand, and no amount of references will solve, is that there is practically no reliable tropical data for most of the time period, and without knowing the tropical sensitivity, we have no way of knowing how cold (or warm) the globe actually got. ”
1738.txt: Tree expert Rod Savidge writes: “ What troubles me even more than the inexactness attending chronological estimates is how much absolute nonsense — really nothing but imaginative speculation — about the environment of the past is being deduced from tree rings and published in dendrochronology journals. ”
3219.txt: Savidge again: “ As a tree physiologist who has devoted his career to understanding how trees make wood, I have made sufficient observations on tree rings and cambial growth to know that dendrochronology is not at all an exact science. Indeed, its activities include subjective interpretations of what does and what does not constitute an annual ring, statistical manipulation of data to fulfill subjective expectations, and discarding of perfectly good data sets when they contradict other data sets that have already been accepted. ”

%d bloggers like this: