Guest post by Harold Ambler
The reasons that climatologist Michael Mann is as successful as he is are multiple:
1. He told the United Nations something that it was dying to hear (he offered certainty when all else saw uncertainty)
2. He has brought serious money to the universities that house him (and run cover for him)
3. He is an extremely talented propagandist
I discuss this in a letter just published by The Wall Street Journal.
Although Michael Mann has the ear of the media in the United States and the United Kingdom, at a minimum, he complains of sailing into the wind of special-interest disinformation. Alas, this is its own potent form of disinformation.
Letter follows:
My Oily Millions
In Anne Jolis’s review of “The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars” (“The Climate Kamikaze,” Weekend Books, March 16), Miss Jolis notes that “In his book, [Michael] 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.’ “
The reviewer summarizes Mr. Mann’s incessant claim of big-oil bullying perfectly. This indeed is, as the expression goes, how Mr. Mann rolls. And it’s true not just about Mr. Mann and his emails, but about nearly every instance of anyone daring to question the version of climate science promulgated by Mr. Mann.
This is all a bit hard to take. I myself am a skeptical blogger and author, yet I am in no way funded by Big Oil. In fact, my three-and-a-half years of toiling on the subject of climate change has yielded approximately $4,000 worth of income. I’m not proud of this fact as a father, husband or man, but it does undercut the constant conspiracy theories about funding behind global-warming skepticism. Meanwhile, as I’ve noted elsewhere, mainstream climate scientists themselves have received grants totalling more than $1 billion from Exxon Mobil, Shell, BP and other large energy companies.
Mr. Mann’s book largely sticks to the familiar conclusions of climate science. Readers might be interested to learn that the current interglacial period, the Holocene, is the coolest of the last five. The one before ours, the Eemian, which ran between approximately 130,000 and 115,000 years ago, likely saw temperature averages of 2° Celsius warmer than today, and sea levels about 15 feet higher. Climatologically, if humans could time-travel to the most ideal time to live on Earth, we would be unlikely to find a better moment than right now. The Holocene, including and especially our own moment within it, is a beautiful climactic nest.
As for those who would convince the public that the sky is falling, one has to ask: Who benefits from such frightening claims?
– Harold Ambler
============================================================
(Please let it serve as the occasion when you choose to buy and enjoy my book, available for Kindle and in paperback at Amazon.)
Buy the book here:
@u.k.(us)
WTF?
From Gail Combs on March 21, 2012 at 6:07 pm:
“East Anglia emails” went down some time ago. I found the same on FOIA2011, with the raw files by number found here (use 10 digits as needed in “raw file” box, add leading zero, ex. 0962818260.txt). Here’s the links with a searchable line if you have to find them in the future. If there’s a second FOIA2011 link, that’s because it showed up twice on the site search and by the numbering I think that’s the 2011 release.
BTW, to make it official, do not use the dot-nu links unless you have to, as they are raw and un-redacted, if you must use them as a source then make the redactions after copying, as We Are The Good Guys.
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=5470
http://di2.nu/foia/0962818260.txt
“Had a very good meeting with Shell yesterday.”
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=5455
http://di2.nu/foia/0947541692.txt
“I have talked with Tim O’Riordan and others here today and Tim has a wealth of contacts he is prepared to help with.”
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=5631
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=57
http://di2.nu/foia/1056478635.txt
“NOAA want to give us more money for the El Nino work with IGCN.”
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=5569
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=610
http://di2.nu/foia/1019513684.txt
“I can’t quite see what all the fuss is about Watson – why should he be re-nominated anyway?”
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=6340
http://di2.nu/foia/1254832684.txt
“Getting a bit fed up with these baseless allegations.”
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=5503
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4767
http://di2.nu/foia/0973374325.txt
“Any idea who at Cambridge has been benefitting from this BP money?”
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=5484
http://di2.nu/foia/0968691929.txt
“Notes from the meeting with Shell International attached.”
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=5458
http://di2.nu/foia/0951431850.txt
“The Esso (Exxon-Mobil) situation is still promising, but they’re having to
get clearance from HQ in the USA…”
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=5661
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=3771
http://di2.nu/foia/1065125462.txt
“Unfortunately Phil Jones is travelling and will probably be unable to offer a separate reply.”
Honesty Time: I saw this list when Googling as given by Jimbo. I’ve tried to make sure I found the same emails by the numbering. BUT they don’t all show the seeking of Big Oil and corporation cash. The last one is Mikey Mann telling a journalist CO2 Science is funded by “ExxonMobile”. The fourth, 1019513684.txt, complains that Exxon pressured President Bush to get Pachauri in as IPCC head. You should review all nine, see how relevant they really are.
Besides, the currying of big oil and corporation money by CRU/Hadley/Tyndall is easy enough to find. I just searched for “shell” at FOIA2011 and found:
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=686
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=752
Etc. Note there’ll be a lot of “false hits” from Shell email addresses that are redacted. Also try searching at the dot-nu site. That lead me to find:
http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=5482
http://di2.nu/foia/0968367517.txt
Etc. Etc. And etc. ad nauseum. And that’s just from one Big Oil company, and not all of them for it. Pick a company name, go hunting, it’s a target rich environment.
And they say WE are the ones getting Big Oil money? Is that a backhanded ploy where they’re whipping up sentiment to scare off those companies from funding ANY skeptical research? After all, imagine the SHEER HORROR if big companies would cut back on the (C)AGW-pusher funding to give some “equal time” to skeptics. Think of the children!™
The claims of ‘Big Oil funding ‘ are actual not a strong point of ‘the cause ‘ as its proponents think, because in reality most people know those accused of this aren’t getting any ‘Big Oil funding ‘ at all. So in their eyes it makes no sense and looks like what it is, a lie.
People don’t like to be taken for fools and one of ‘the Teams’ weakness is they have a very low opinion of the general population, on top of a very high opinion of themselves, so they tend to keep doing this and when caught out trying to BS their way out of it further enforcing the problem.
Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings and commented:
🙂 I started a new blog [ more like a scrapbook ] Please send BIG OIL monies.
As I wanna be rich before I get out o school.
Thank you! Your book confirmed all my prejudices. I didn’t have to think at all!
kim2ooo says:
March 22, 2012 at 4:02 am
” Money can’t buy happiness, ……. but at least you can park your yacht next to it” – David Lee Roth
Normally I wouldn’t quote a vacuous rock star, but that is kinda funny.
Mann claims that when he entered climate science he did not expect it to be so controversial. Assuming the role of victim (as P. Jones did after the first climategate) is a common tactic to garner sympathy. The game was fully afoot when Mann came on the scene, and it was VERY controversial. Therefore, his claim cannot be true.
When my father started his doctoral thesis it could be said to be true because back then talking about the weather was something you did when there was no other common ground to discuss. No one had even heard of global warming. When viewed on a larger timescale, it reveals that Mann is not being honest. About many things.
Once the general public starts to see the deception, all the wheels will come off the bus. The general public as of now does not fully appreciate what is at stake.
Those on fixed incomes (the majority of the population, as I include the working poor) are not going to like paying huge energy bills. Obama has made a giant mistake not addressing realistic energy policies. Green agenda is not based in reality.
Wow, drive-by snark against Ambler’s book instead of the post,
while using a facebook account that was either always fake or quickly canceled.
Your bravery is noted.
Oh look, facebook found that name! Have to be signed in to see it, but when you are…
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1560526643
Michael Vaughmit
Worked at Fake Company
Studied at Fakenham College
Employers Fake Company
etc
Michael Mann, is that really you? Are you upset about Ambler’s book selling better?
Never mind. The moderators shall hopefully now take note of this fake name used by this enormously brave individual, and give it appropriate treatment whenever it shows up here again.
RockyRoad says: March 21, 2012 at 4:38 pm
“…then we might finally have a penitent Mann…”
“Penitent Mann” tops even “Jumbo Shrimp”, “Liquid Air”, and “Climate Science” as the best oxymoron ever.
Wot? Are you his alter ego?
ukus totally misunderstood your post. Should have spent all that time spent type-ranting reading instead.
Well said, Harold.
I just ordered your book.