All I can say is “ouch”! Mann of course will be sending his usual letter to the editor whining about unfair treatment. He’s really just misunderstood you see.
Excerpts from the review by Anne Jolis:
The book’s climax is a recounting of the 2009 leak or hack of emails and other documents written by Mr. Mann and his associates (and funneled through the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit). The correspondence, along with a second trove released in 2011, highlighted the patchwork behind IPCC science. The leading lights of publicly funded climatology appeared to be brainstorming to pressure journals and review boards to suppress work that challenged their theories, trading tips on how to avoid public-information requests and planning how to present their findings so as to best further “the cause.”
In his book, Mr. Mann dubs the unauthorized release of his emails a “crime” and claims that the ensuing “witch hunt” constituted “the most malicious” of “attack after vitriolic attack against us” by the “corporate-funded denial machine.”
Yet for all his caviling about “smear campaigns,” “conspiracy theorists” and “character assassination,” Mr. Mann is happy to employ similar tactics against his opponents. Patrick Michaels, former president of the American Association of State Climatologists and a past program chair of the American Meteorological Society’s Committee on Applied Climatology, is introduced as “a prominent climate change contrarian at the University of Virginia primarily known for his advocacy for the fossil fuel industry.” (Nowhere does Mr. Mann explain why a scientist might be more easily corrupted by a check from, say, a coal company than by one from a politically controlled institution.)
Just this February, Mr. Mann took to the Daily Kos to praise the theft of internal documents from the free-market Heartland Institute for offering “a peek behind the curtain of industry-funded climate change denial.” It was revelatory, but not in the way he thought. Hours after Mr. Mann posted his online musings, the much-decorated hydroclimatologist Peter Gleick (2003 MacArthur fellow, adviser to the EPA and, until recently, chairman of the American Geophysical Union’s task force on scientific ethics) confessed to the Heartland theft. Apologizing for his actions, he wrote that he had been “blinded by my frustration with the ongoing efforts—often anonymous, well-funded, and coordinated—to attack climate science and scientists.”
Mr. Mann closes “The Hockey Stick” with a passionate call for more scientists to join him “on the front lines of the climate wars.” “Scientific truth alone,” Mr. Mann writes, “is not enough to carry the day in the court of public opinion.” It would be “irresponsible,” he says, “for us to silently stand by while industry-funded climate change deniers succeed in confusing and distracting the public and dissuading our policy makers from taking appropriate actions.” These are unfortunate conclusions for a scientist-turned-climate-warrior whose greatest weakness has always been a low estimation of the public intellect.
=========
Full review here
Also related:
Shollenberger’s Technical Review of Mann’s recent book
Josh on Mann’s Jurassic Moment
Gleick declares in Mann’s book review (after phishing Heartland) – “there IS a war on”
Man, oh Mann-o-matic what a whine! (with apologies to Manischewitz wine)
Mann is on the ABC in Australia right now, Lateline. It’s a laugh, hope you guys can get to view it.
He was asked who the big oil funded vested interest groups are who are trying to discredit him and send death threats and he just rambled on and never answered it.
Oh dear, “hide the decline” just came up and the interviewer pushed the myth about temperature declining and being hidden.
“I’m not sure if the news has reached WUWT but in the tradition of ironic Australian humour some Australian farmers have renamed “inches” of rain as “flanneries”: “yeah, we had two flanneries yesterday, how much did you get?””
Perhaps we can declare a new unit — the “Mann” — to be cubic yards of manure? “I spread fifty Mann on my fields yesterday.”
“We need to regulate the nutters from our ranks if we are to be taken serioiusly as a realist argument.”
While I sympathize, that’s not the way to win the argument. It’s the precise behavior she’s complaining about, so it would simply reinforce her position.
Is it possible to find out how many copies of his book were sold (pre-sold) to Green Peace, WWF, etc…?
Why else write a book that has nothing new?
Under the table pay off?
Polistra, Let me guess. You flunked most of your science courses.
Consider the idea that Mann’s book and PR blitz are his attempt to save what few uncritical followers he still may have. It is unlikely he expects to get new followers; getting new followers would be doubtful given his malignant message, irrational (unscientific) bias and reality challenged intellect. I think it is not a coincidence he has become a compulsive PR seeker while on leave from PSU; it is apparent to me he has a mission while away from PSU to retain his cadre of believers.
John
Mr. Mann is a member of the CAGW Control Freaks–“Control Freak” because that’s what he has to resort to instead of the truth to sway both public opinion and his colleagues.
This is a nasty, little man–comparable to the best liars ever invented.
He lies for money.
He lies for prestige.
He lies to protect his “accomplishments”.
I’ll say it again–Mann is a nasty, little man. And as a recent poll from Kos indicated, nobody but the truly brainwashed believe what he says and that is how it should be.
Mann correctly identifies his work when he writes of war and warriors.
Carl Philipp Gottfried von Clausewitz: Clausewitz had many aphorisms, of which the most famous is that “War is the continuation of Politik by other means” (Politik being variously translated as ‘policy’ or ‘politics,’ terms with very different implications), a description that has won wide acceptance.
Peter B says:
March 15, 2012 at 5:34 am
These aren’t “colleagues”–they’re “partners in crime”. And their criminal act is linked to genocide–sucking literally $Billions away from much more worthy and helpful causes that truly help humanity. And for what?
I haven’t seen a single thing regarding the control of CO2 or the climate that has helped mankind. Not a single thing.
Open to response: If anybody has a verifiable rebuttal to my position, I’d be glad to hear it.
Here! Transcript and video of Michael Mann interviewed on Australian TV tonight.
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3454652.htm
Anne Jolis has got my admiration and respect…her review (critique) was very effective…it is obvious she has little respect for this pretender but understands that adjectives that I might want to use to describe his despicable behavoir might not work for WSJ readers.
I would love to hear Vaclav Klaus’ review of this book. After many conversations with the “enviro” crowd, I fear that history will repeat itself, ……
It’s time to make it a level research effort. Lets mandate that all the money spent by the fossil fuel industry in support of the deniers be matched for the warmers if they give up all their other sources of funding.
It seems we are, slowly, approaching Critical Mass.
Can’t come soon enough for me.
You gotta love this exchange in the comments to Jolis’s editorial:
Kevin Fisher Replied:
And if it’s a hoax, where are the models that show global cooling, or that show no change over the coming decades?
Stephen Hughes Replied:
I’ll have one ready for you this afternoon….
Mann has plagiarized reality to create this alternate universe of self-pity devoid of scientific morality and to use it as a conduit to implore other real world loathers to rally ’round the cause. A book is known by the company it keeps.
To offer my own minor plagiarization, let the word for forth from this place, from this time, that we will not accept this and call it science; we will not be moved by pleas for science by consensus, nobel cause, nor appeals to authority. Science with these prerequisites is not science at all. Let the deniers of honest science know it ends here, now.
Defund the team, disband the IPCC.
Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad.
Attributed to Euripides
from WSJ
Mike Mangan Replied:
[snip – lets leave that reference to a dictator unsaid here – Anthony]
There is nothing so dangerous as a belief wrapped up as fact.
Mann simply ignores data
1) Mid tropospheric temps, where the IPCC’s vaunted trapping heat was supposed to occur, just reached record lows in the satellite era
2) Co2 continues up, the earths temps have leveled 1997-2008 and since 2008 and the turn to the colder PDO have started down in the same jagged fashion they moved up, after the end of the cold pdo in the 70s. The dirty little secret. Objective sat measurements started at the end of the cold pdo, the deck , cyclically has been stacked for warming since the late 1970s.
3) The fact that with the PDO warm and the amo turning warm, that the temps have not gone up, simple confirms a well known fact that the warmer it gets, the harder it is to get it warmer ( one must keep adding energy) Since the oceans warmed to a point then leveled off, game set match in the longer sense. and also it SHOWS CO2 IS NOT A CAUSE.
4) Most damming to Mann are the lack of hockey sticks in the Chinese study on this matter. What China is not affected by a global occurrence that leaves us with the hockey stick. How can that be. Why are they wrong?
5) It is what it is. If temps continue to fall, as I believe they will, we will know the answer. Mann distorts shamelessly the fact that public funding of the AGW agenda outdoes private contributions against it not 1k to 1 not 2 k, but over 20 k to one. His side is not the victim, they are by far the bully.
6) Statements implying that not using the US winter as a sign of climate change as journalistic malpractice are deceit or ignorance. Deceit if he knows the global temps have responded to the La Nina and are below normal, ignorance if he doesnt which shows what alot of us suspect he does not look at the actual data and the glaring disconnect to fossil fuels, and the connection to the pdo flip. Being he is still at my alma mater, I will show him the link for global temps since the pdo flip
http://policlimate.com/climate/cfsr_t2m_2011.png
that being said, since an el nino is coming on, there will be a rise in the coming year before another turn down, but the peak temps should not reach the last el nino. Still you have to be blind not to see that since the pdo flip, its not just leveling off but the start of a trend down. Since this was forecasted by many of us, which is why we dont believe this, because we have to make forecasts not just research something, you can see why we scoff at such things.
A final word of wisdom. Dr, Mann, unless you are making a product out of your idea, for instance a verifiable forecast, you are no warrior for the cause you are claiming you are. You are showing us things, we are challenging them. Then we make a forecast,. mine 3 years ago was we would start a downward trend in temps that will take us back to 1978 by 2030. For the first 3 years, that is verifying. But simply showing us an idea, asking us to act, without then having it stand the test of battle, does not make you a warrior in a war, or a victim. It makes you a bystander rooting on a result, in which case you are a fan, and of an agenda that is only interested in control of people, not on the right answer.
Make a forecast for us. Where is the earths temps as measured by objective satellite in 10 years. If its not up to where it was supposed to be based on what you are saying, you are not in the game. If it is, then I my ilk are driven from the field, But dont play victim when for 17 years we have seen no change, and there are perfectly sound physical reasons involving the major drivers for that, when all we are doing is not making a you a victim, but questioning the reasons we should simply follow your ideas like sheep.
I have read everything you have done, stayed out of situations that would criticize you because I see what you looked at and understood your conclusions. But stop with the victim stuff when there are people, myself included, who have been on the “front line” of forecasting and have a background that relies on past weather as a precursor to the future, that disagree with you and are willing to stand up and say so
“(Nowhere does Mr. Mann explain why a scientist might be more easily corrupted by a check from, say, a coal company than by one from a politicaly controlled institution.)”
It’s indicative of his mindset. To him it quite literally goes without saying that fossil fuel companies have nefarious purposes and are generally run by evil people bent on destroying the world.
“Scientific truth alone is not enough to carry the day in the court of public opinion.”
I guess that’s why he has to use a trick to hide the decline and refuses to release e-mails that were paid for by the public.
Tom Barney says:
March 15, 2012 at 7:30 am
Actually, if the fossil fuel industry would fund “deniers” (“realists” to most of us) even close to the same level they fund climate science usurpers (aka CAGW), we’d have a far better understanding of the climate. We’d also have a clear understanding of how $Billions have been wasted on fraudulent studies supporting bogus hypotheses, which revelation would be a complete embarrassment to “climate scientists” and those who threw money at this whole circus needlessly.
…a passionate call for more scientists to join him “on the front lines of the climate wars.”
First of all, there are no more warmist scientists to join him on the front lines of his looking glass war. As he well knows, the scientists who are not there already are busy reading the best science blog multiple years running.
However, he may be right about climategate being a crime. I’m beginning to think the e-mails were leaked by someone at UEA, probably (a) ostensible warmist(s), trying to influence the markets ahead of the the annual climate conferences for shortselling climate futures.
Yeah, I really do think they are that cynical.
Bloke down the pub says: @ur momisugly March 15, 2012 at 3:20 am
In the UK, and I suspect most of the English speaking world, the media have a long tradition of puffing up people to the status of hero, only to take great delight in bringing them crashing back down to zero. ….
____________________________________
Dr David M.W. Evans in his article, Climate Coup — The Politics, identifies a “regulating class” Bill Clinton’s mentor Carroll Quigley identifies the “Rulers” of the “regulating class” in his books.
Micheal Mann and the other greenies are cannon fodder just as the MSM is their propaganda arm. In Quigley’s one-volume history of the twentieth century entitled “Tragedy and Hope” (1966) he states:
Environmentalism and CAGW are just strategies of this ruling “network” and will be jettisoned along with the leaders of the “Cannon fodder” who are found to be “embarrassing” Those who are more circumspect will just move on to promote the newest scam. Mann however will probably be offered up as the sacrificial lamb if public outrage is deep enough. Otherwise CAGW will just fade away as the newest scare scam takes its place and Mann will sink into obscurity.