I was surprised to see this essay and poll on the Daily Kos tonight.
Don Mikulecky writes:
Michael Mann is a Modern Hero and we need to acknowledge that!
I have been both a scientist and a political activist for most of my 76 years. But the situation regarding Michael Mann is very different. I just finished a very moving experience reading The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines and I have lots more to say than I can fit in a single diary. So I will devote this diary to trying to convince you that this Mann is a hero. There are too few heroes among the scientific community because of the nature of what we do.
Michael Mann was not someone who chose his role. Military persons can anticipate the possibility of being in situations where acts of heroism are called for. Scientists are certainly not in the same situation. Or at least, they have not been for a long time. Galileo comes to mind and it was the Church then that made his life one of great sacrifice. In these times the situation has deteriorated so rapidly that few of us have had a chance to evaluate the impact of what is going on. Science is a threat to the dark forces that are moving to control us all. People like Carl Sagan and Stephen jay Gould were out there early on fighting against these dark forces. They did a lot for us. Rachael Carlson and many others were on the front lines.
Yet the situation with Professor Mann is something beyond all that. He has become a symbol for what our future is all about and he did not chose his role. No sane person would have. Read on below and I will try to paint a broad picture of how much is at stake and give you a perspective on how this one Mann has focused on the threat to all of us.
…
The full essay is here:
And, there is a poll at the end which has some surprising choices.
Update 3/14: One of the comments there is by somebody who posts here regularly, John Sully. He writes:
Anthony Watts posted about this over at his site and told the trolls to come and freep the poll. This is why year after year his site gets voted “Best Science Blog” or whatever.
Mr. Sully please point out exactly where in the 35 words I wrote (the rest are from Kos) in this essay I have “…told the trolls to come and freep the poll.” Otherwise sir, you are a liar. – Anthony
Looks like we’ve got a CONSENSUS here – how appropriate!
Friends:
This poll is a valuable teaching aid. Screenshots of its progress need to be taken and stored. This was done for the similar UK Science Museum poll that showed similar results until they were “adjusted”. The screen shots prevent later misrepresentation of the “adjusted” results.
AGW-proponents live in a closed circle of people who share a common view and objective. Their blogs (e.g. RC, SKS, etc.) are ‘echo chambers’ where only their extreme views are shown and any alternative is either censored so does not appear or is excoriated and ridiculed with no right of reply. And members of the mass-media have promoted these extreme views for a variety of reasons (not least that a ‘scare story’ is news and ‘nothing is happening’ is not news).
Hence, AGW-promoters are conditioned to believe a one-sided and untrue version of reality (i.e. AGW is a ‘proven’ threat to the world and only evil deniers in the pay of ‘Big Oil’ and ‘Big Coal’ oppose action to deal with it).
But in the real world most people have more important things to care about than AGW. Feeding, clothing, and housing their families in the here and now have higher priority than worrying about changes in the weather that may – or may not – happen several decades in the future.
The AGW-proponents do not see this disconnect between themselves and people who live normal lives because they are isolated in their closed circle. So, they hold polls to prove how most people share their view when most people don’t.
And the polls reveal the reality. So, they adjust the poll data as their ‘heroes’ adjust climate data to make it agree with what they want to think is true.
Richard
At this moment, 98,1% of 1998 votes are negative.
Robin Hewitt says:
March 14, 2012 at 3:11 am
“Not really an opinion poll since Anthony released the enormous blog-firepower of WUWT on it.”
I beg your pardon? Do you have any idea of the Alexa rankings of TPM, Think Progress or Daily Kos? Well, you surely could find out if you wanted to. Obviously you don’t want to.
@ur momisugly Peter Plail, Marrch 14, 2012 at 2:11 am :
Here’s the version I got:
<blockquote)Please note: There is a 24-hour waiting period for making new comments and a one-week waiting period for writing new diaries. (We know, you're angry NOW!)
I found the assumption (promotion?) of anger on the part of potential commenters to be interesting. It fits the distinct lack of a sense of levity I’ve noticed among my more devotedly alarmist acquaintances. The current 98% negative ain’t gonna help with that, I’m afraid. ☺☺
/dr.bill
@ur momisugly Peter Plail, Marrch 14, 2012 at 2:11 am :
Here’s the version I got:
[snip . . . double posting . . kbmod]
/dr.bill
DirkH says: “I beg your pardon? Do you have any idea of the Alexa rankings of TPM, Think Progress or Daily Kos? Well, you surely could find out if you wanted to. Obviously you don’t want to”.
Not so much, ‘don’t want to’, so much as, ‘can’t be bothered’. I realise it is important to voice the skeptic viewpoint but the writer is 76, I’m just hoping that that we haven’t scared him.
well it’s not science, but it sure is funny.
Willis – “People ain’t buyin’ it.”
Actually Willis, from the way the numbers jumped after this post, readers of WUWt ain’t buying it.
Not quite the same thing.
“Robin Hewitt says:
March 14, 2012 at 3:11 am
Not really an opinion poll since Anthony released the enormous blog-firepower of WUWT on it.
Should Mann et al. ever start answering their critics with hard science we must be prepared to listen with open minds. In a quantum universe anything is possible.”
Will not happen. People like me have been waiting for years for the CAGW side to answer with serious science. Their glaring lack in that area is why they can’t face serious debate. They always lose. The shadow science they use is designed to look like the real thing while taking in fools. When you remove the somke and mirrors from their presentations and talk truth, you are forced to admit that CAGW is a not a problem. Yes, there was a little warming 15 to 40 years past. And yes you can find some going back to the little ice age. But, that is all they have. Yesterdays news and nothing outside of expected natrual varation.They can’t allow themselfes to give up their smoke or mirrors doing so would cost them their self respect and for many their jobs.
They cannot even allow themselves to consider the possibility they are that wrong. In order to do so they would have to set aside their egos and become honest. Much harder than you think.
Paul
“He has become a symbol for what our future is all about and he did not chose his role. No sane person would have.”
1. He did choose the role.
2. “No sane person would have.” You noticed that, eh?
2012/03/13 18:56: positive choices 2/0/4/12, negative choices 89/38 out of 145.
2012/03/14 07:30 EDT: positive choices 8/2/5/26, negative choices 1553/536 out of 2130.
Keep in mind that this post was put up on March 9th. In the first 3 days, they managed fewer than 145 votes.
John M Reynolds
Wahey!
did not choose to became a symbol 0% 8 votes
has been attacked in many of the same ways that the President and John Kerry were 0% 2 votes
Is an outstanding scientist and human being 0% 5 votes
all of the above 1% 26 votes
is distorting evidence to prove his point 72% 1553 votes
should be fired from the university 25% 537 votes
Just voted for sacking. A view I have had for some time.
“I have been both a scientist and a political activist for most of my 76 years.”
RED FLAG ALERT! Sorry, can’t have it both ways.
Anthony, you come up with the funniest angles for a good laugh. I read the Mann hagiography and laughed and vomited at the same time, then took a look at the poll (which seemed to be closed), cracked up completely for half an hour, then came back here & caught more of the comments (more laughs) & then one of them said you can still vote if you go directly to the site, not as a link from WUWT, which surprised me because I would have thought they would have torn it down by this (tears are rolling down my face). So I did and then…I voted too! The % for sacking him just went up.
Michael Mann is to be interviewed By Anna Marie Tremonti this morning on CBC’s The Current. Should be amusing.
As far as I’m concerned, Mann is one of those bastards who have done things that have led to my family being made poorer by our stupid Labor government’s “climate change” policies. He influenced them and encouraged them with his BS hoax claims. I’m going to vote again, what the heck!
Ability to vote in poll taken offline about 7:50 AM EST. Final results are:
2187 total votes
2145 negative (98 %)
42 positive (2%)
That was very entertaining to watch!
Oops never mind my last comment, the poll must lock out my computer from further ability to vote by looking at the IP address or something. But the percentages are correct.
We have a new “97% agree” poll !!!! Maybe we should start throwing this back at the alarmists.
If I was Mann I would be very worried as only kooks seem to be supporting him, anyone aware of climate scientists giving him such ring kissing tributes.
And could we help this guy out as he seems to be a bit confused about who Mr Mann is like because it ain’t Galileo.
I just voted, the anti-Mann vote stands at just over 98%
That’s an amazing result, particularly as this is, I assume, a pro-AGW site. Maybe many AGW believers simply can’t stomach the thought of supporting Mann. Deep down, they know he’s a scientific fraud.
There’s one thing that doesn’t compute. Although the vote is overwhelmingly anti-Mann, all the comments seem to be pro-Mann. It does seem these people simply can’t stand the thought of criticism or real debate. Looks like they resorted to Mannian statistics to fix the comments.
Truely, these people are beneath contempt.
Chris
Looks like 97% of repsondents think Mann is a liar! That’s settled science in my book.
Don Mikulecky, prof. emerit. Why isn’t there some “Comical Ali” award you can give to such people? Sacha Baron Cohen might serve as Master of Ceremonies.