Booker mentions Mann – Mann has a Twitter tantrum

Telegraph columnist Christopher Booker has taken note of the Shakun et al takedowns here here here here here here and here at WUWT, linking it in with Michael Mann’s earlier proxy publications.

(h/t to EU Referendum and REP) Mann as usual, was not amused by anything using his name (unless laudatory), and launched this Twitter tantrum (h/t to Tom Nelson):

Twitter / @MichaelEMann: @MichaelEMann @Telegraph ” …

@MichaelEMann @Telegraph “Patron Saint of Charlatans” Booker even starts out w/ tired smear against Ben Santer I debunk in intro of #HSCW

Twitter / @MichaelEMann: @ret_ward Would think that …

@ret_ward Would think that even they might be put off by the deficiency of intelligence & honesty reflected by Booker’s hit pieces/polemics

Twitter / @MichaelEMann: @MichaelEMann @Telegraph H …

@MichaelEMann @Telegraph How much lying/libel/deceit will Telegraph allow before “Patron Saint of Charlatans” Chris Booker canned? #HSCW

Twitter / @MichaelEMann: I guess “Patron Saint of C …

I guess “Patron Saint of Charlatans” Booker of @Telegraph disliked (tgr.ph/IFXN76) light shined on him by #HSCWbit.ly/sRasaq

=============================================================

Meanwhile, Climate Depot reports that Mann may be asked to chair a school of something back at UVa. Word has it on the academic grapevine that his “sabbatical” at Penn State may be the beginning of a never ending story.

One wonders though, if this just isn’t an exit strategy that Mann has engineered himself. As we’ve seen though his many writings, he’s very good at self promotion.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Mann’s new book: “How to look stupid in 140 characters or less”.

Matt in Houston

Bahahahaha!
Sometimes all one can do in the face of a fool is laugh.
Please, Mr. Mann provide us with some more laughter, it seems all you are good for. Your skill in science is non-existent.
What a pathetic, narcissistic little man.

Barry Sheridan

In making these sort of comments Mr Mann is doing a good job of imitating a child. If he finds himself a odds with Christopher Booker he can say so without resorting to pathetic slurs and juvenile insults. It’s all rather sad given the urgent need for grown up debate in the public domain.

“Of course, there are still a few free-range climate scientists on the loose out there, but their increasingly erratic behaviour has isolated them from everyone, most interestingly their own side, who quite rightly fear it’s only a matter of time until they land themselves, and “the cause”, into another disaster of gleickian proportions.”
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2012/03/16/the-climate-wars-revisited-or-no-truce-with-kings/
At this stage, he can’t help himself. He’ll eventually pull the pin.
Pointman

geoprof

It is disconcerting that an academician is allowed by the university system to function in such an immature, dysfunctional manner. The man has beclowned himself so many times. One would think the university would rather he keep his mouth shut.

JohnH

A sensitive wee soul !!!! 😉

Jeff

Or, the Mann who put the twit back in twitter…

Aaargghh!! What happened to his head!!

apachewhoknows

Michael Mann,,,jaba blah,blah in a hut.

Interstellar Bill

I wonder for whom Mann will be voting in November?
Such a sterling scientist surely makes such a major choice only after long, deep pondering.

Monty

So, these ‘takedowns’ of the Shakun et al paper are going to be submitted to peer-review are they? Or are they just a typical post on WUWT where someone like Pat Frank or Willis Eschenbach writes a critical review of a mainstream peer-reviewed paper which is automatically cheered to the rafters by a bunch of skeptics who don’t understand it? How about a review of some REALLY bad science (you know the stuff produced by Soon and Baliunas etc).
By the way, is it true that Willis Eschenbach has only ever published papers in Energy and Environment …the non-ISI rated journal that will publish anything so long as its skeptical of AGW?

The Booker article is a good summary of the low points of climate science. It should be read by all. Given Rio+20 in 2 months, Booker is giving fair warning for what is to come.

RockyRoad

Mann calling for Booker’s job shows Mann has been exposed as a non-scientist. Every day it gets worse for Mann–but then the tenure of every charlatan never ends well.

TheBigYinJames

Is it just me, or does the mere sight of Mann, Gleik etc these days annoy the heck out of you? Perhaps I’m just imagining the air of smugness.

Interstellar Bill says:
April 16, 2012 at 8:12 am
I wonder for whom Mann will be voting in November?
Such a sterling scientist surely makes such a major choice only after long, deep pondering.

Uh, he’ll probably send in a proxy vote.
🙂

Phil C

One wonders though, if this just isn’t an exit strategy that Mann has engineered himself. As we’ve seen though his many writings, he’s very good at self promotion.
Anthony, why don’t you apply for Joe D and Helen J Kington Professor in Environmental Change job at UVA? At a minimum, you should at least be granted an audience to tell UVA why Mann is wrong and you are right about climate change!

polistra

I’d think moving back to UVa would be unwise. Most of the legal action against Mann has been coming from Va’s attorney general. As far as we can tell publicly, Pennsylvania hasn’t made any moves against Mann. Though UVA has done yeoman work in defending Mann’s idiocy, it wouldn’t be smart to count on that in the future.
Could this be an indirect indication that Mann knows something’s brewing in State College? Maybe part of their post-Joepa cleanup?

Latitude

..it’s all about the science

Pull My Finger

Bless its pointy little head.

Jeff

@omnologos, maybe he was trying to hide the decline? Or it’s not him, but a model, where
the data’s been,er, corrected (hence the Redux in the photo credit)….PHB in training?

Jimmy Haigh

Someone should tell him not to sit too close to the camera next time.

rgbatduke

Why waste time on this?
Look, if Mann were actually a scientist and worthy of respect, he wouldn’t twitter about Willis plots, he would address them in some substantive way. I’m not certain how he might proceed to do that — Willis is just plotting the data, after all, he didn’t obtain the data himself and it is the same data, in many places, used in the Shakun paper — but the data is right there, he can get it for himself, plot it for himself, and analyze it himself. For that matter, anybody can go to the WUWT pages and look at the arguments and plots for themselves, although spread out over three posts its a bit tedious at this point to work though it all (which is why Willis should turn it into a paper and submit it somewhere).
What he does is not beyond criticism, by the way. I’m still not so sure about the validity of his rescaling the data to be able to put all of the temperature trends on the same scale because this makes some assumptions about where, how, and when the warming occurred that might need justification (at least I might need him to further argue that they are correct and reasonable, given that the way the warming proceeded in the tropics dominates the surface area because of the Jacobean and because yet another metric for the dominant warming would be warming in the band of latitudes with the greatest fraction of oceanic surface area and the latter — progression of the warming over ocean volumes — is what one would expect to drive the CO_2 concentration according to a numerically computable model, actually). However, that does not mean that he isn’t clear about what he’s done and how he’s plotted and analyzed the result.
What stops Mann from grabbing the data and doing the same general thing for himself? He’s presumably actually funded by Our Government for doing precisely this sort of research, unlike either Willis or myself or Anthony or many of the other people here who spend a fair bit of time actually messing with models and numbers.
The most impressive thing about Mann is that he is, in fact, the CAGW crowd’s own worst enemy. He has done more damage to the scientific argument in favor of CAGW than any other single human, precisely because he spends so very much time name calling and indulging in petty ad hominem and so very little in calmly reasoned argument.
What I think is happening is that the shoe is finally dropping. I hadn’t seen the Mauna Loa transmittivity data before today, but it is very, very worrisome. A 1% negative trend over only 30 years! Goodness gracious, and here we are worrying about carbon dioxide, which at most and according to its most ardent supporters is responsible for at most 100% of Mann’s hockey stick. I’m certain that somebody is quietly realizing that this 1% is enough to completely cancel all of this warming, and that is before looking at the extra 2% negative change in mean insolation due to the 7% increase in albedo over the last 15 years.
The temperature curves — even GISS and CRUT3 — are starting to turn down. Worse, we can understand why they are turning down, we can predict that they must turn down. We may not understand why the atmosphere is reflecting more light or absorbing more of it well above the surface of the Earth, but we can see that it is doing so by looking at reflected Earthlight on the dark side of the moon and at reflected light received by distant satellites. We can even connect it directly with a gradually increasing cloud cover. I think the CAGW enthusiasts — having literally bet their careers on CAGW and doomsday — are praying that a miracle will happen, the laws of physics will be suspended, and temperatures will turn around and go back up, or more reasonably, that whatever unknown conditions that have downregulated the transmittivity and increased the albedo will go back the way they were so doomsday can proceed, but at the same time they must know that the sun is probably the proximate cause and that thereby their careers are almost certainly doomed. Time to hedge one’s bets, get a good permanent job while you still can, and invest in a small castle to hold off the peasants with the pitchforks and torches who will, without doubt, come for you when they learn that they’ve spent thousands of dollars apiece indulging your heroic fantasy.
Maybe I’ll have time today to put together a top post on this. Lord knows I want to. But of course to do that, I have to stop posting to stuff like this…
So I conclude. Don’t waste your time on Mann. If the best he can do to reply to an article that challenges one of his scientific convictions is to call somebody names, he is completely ignorable.
rgb

Chuck Nolan

“Twitter tantrum” I love it! That’s the correct term.

Pete of Perth

Trying to comprehend what the twiteratti write gives me motion sickness.

Chuck Nolan

I am such a “doubting Thomas” always thinking the worst in some people. I was thinking the only reason Professor Mann wanted to get back to UVA was to get back into the UVA mail system to “hide his decline”.

beesaman

Just think, in the not so distant future he will be studied and ridiculed as the creator of ‘Mann Made Global Warming.’
And yes he is an odious litle publicity seeker and is a model for all that is wrong in present day academia…..

Bill H

Mann’s pointy head fits the dunce cap well…

frozenohio

Somebody has his panties in a wad….

Snotrocket

“How much lying/libel/deceit will Telegraph allow…
Of course, there is a perfectly good remedy, Dr Mann. I think Christopher Booker knows his way around the libel courts in the UK. So, as they say in these parts, shut up or put up.

Betcha the number of people who saw the tweets here outnumber the people who read them on their phones, and *they* probably outnumber the people who’ve bought his books…

John from CA

Booker’s comments are very reasonable, why is Mann attacking the author instead of presenting a POV? I guess he didn’t like this statement.
“In 1998, Nature published the first of the two iconic “hockey stick” graphs by an obscure young physicist, Michael Mann, which rewrote climate science by appearing to show that temperatures had suddenly shot up in the late 20th century to easily their highest level in history.”

Dan Kurt

re: @Monte ” How about a review of some REALLY bad science (you know the stuff produced by Soon and Baliunas etc).”
Can anyone point me to a reference that actually shows where Soon and Baliunas are wrong. Are they not Astronomers?
Dan Kurt

Bloke down the pub

Whatever your opinion of Christopher Booker, if he can get Mann into a hissy fit like that, he can’t be all bad.

JohnWho says:
April 16, 2012 at 8:21 am
Uh, he’ll probably send in a proxy vote.
=================================================
The good news is that if he does vote by proxy, there’s a good chance it won’t be correct.

Myrrh

..I read that as Michael Mann’s earlier poxy publications. I wonder how Booker will respond.

Reed Coray

TheBigYinJames says: April 16, 2012 at 8:18 am
Is it just me, or does the mere sight of Mann, Gleik etc these days annoy the heck out of you? Perhaps I’m just imagining the air of smugness.

It’s not just you.

James Allison

Monty says:
April 16, 2012 at 8:12 am
So, these ‘takedowns’ of the Shakun et al paper are going to be submitted to peer-review are they? Or are they just a typical post on WUWT where someone like Pat Frank or Willis Eschenbach writes a critical review of a mainstream peer-reviewed paper which is automatically cheered to the rafters by a bunch of skeptics who don’t understand it? How about a review of some REALLY bad science (you know the stuff produced by Soon and Baliunas etc).
========================================
Thanks for passing by Monty. If you would like to refute ANY of W Eschenbach’s many takedowns of Shakun et al paper then this is the perfect forum to do so. Otherwise piss off back to the echo chamber juvenile sandpits of the warmista blogs where your useless comments will be welcomed.

j molloy

Booker & Dr North’s most exellent book “Scared to Death” was my first eye-opener . thoroughly recommended

Louis Hooffstetter

His twits display the same nasty narcissism as his climategate emails. Perhaps he thinks they should be personal, privileged , and protected from FOI laws as well.
And yes, I know they are called ‘tweets’ but in this case you have to consider the source.

geoprof says:
April 16, 2012 at 8:05 am
It is disconcerting that an academician is allowed by the university system to function in such an immature, dysfunctional manner. The man has beclowned himself so many times. One would think the university would rather he keep his mouth shut.

UPa would have great difficulty ‘disappearing’ the Mann child. He brings too much pre$tige. Only when they realise that the scorn heaped on them for “aiding the charade” (and hiding Mann’s decline) has become an occluding stink, perhaps. No convenient error 404’s like the Norgaard ‘treatment’. Or at least not for now. I would hope they tire of that beady-eyed smirk after a while. Silly me turning blue like that.

Frank K.

Meanwhile, as Mann has yet another bad Twitter day…
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
The arctic sea ice is just NOT cooperating this year…

pat

Don’t these people realize what fools they make of themselves with Twitter?

major9985

I cant belive Michael Mann even took the time to comment about this joke of an article

cui bono

Mann and criticism: bristle, moan, whine.

jimboskype1939

Aloha: RGbatduke-
“What I think is happening is that the shoe is finally dropping. I hadn’t seen the Mauna Loa transmittivity data before today, but it is very, very worrisome. A 1% negative trend over only 30 years! Goodness gracious, and here we are worrying about carbon dioxide, which at most and according to its most ardent supporters is responsible for at most 100% of Mann’s hockey stick. I’m certain that somebody is quietly realizing that this 1% is enough to completely cancel all of this warming, and that is before looking at the extra 2% negative change in mean insolation due to the 7% increase in albedo over the last 15 years……”.
Please DO write a post detailing these items ! Many thanks.

Dave Wendt

Mr.Mann repeatedly calls Mr. Booker the “Patron Saint of Charlatans”. In the future, if you go to a psychology textbook to look up “projection”, you will likely find Mr Mann cited as a perfect exemplar. Perhaps sharing the page with Keith Olberman for his ” Worst Person in the World” awards.

Roger

I say, DONT attack the man Mann attack his work when it is deficient wrong or fraudelent . Any reference to the man’s perceived character does not help. After all a lot of people probably think I got a lousy character haha, but still respect my publications (which were not fraudelent). Otherwise we are falling into same warmist’s tactics which are obviously slowly collapsing LOL

Joseph Bastardi

Perhaps the reason the Chinese continue pumping out 1 coal plant after another is they know there is no hockey stick
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/12/07/in-china-there-are-no-hockey-sticks/
In the meantime the Germans ran their war machine on coal to oil, we are sitting on a camelot of energy to power an economic comeback ( that would lead to more money for future grants to conjur up some other threat, but at least it would be there) and Dr. Mann wonders why in the face of one metric after another showing co2’s relationship to temp is coincidental, why this happens.
Of course in the world of leftists, the solution to a problem is not to confront the problem, but destroy anyone bringing the problem up. Amazingly Eisenhower warned about what could happen with the scientific community, and while they are fond of quoting his warnings about the industrial complex, they dont seem to understand the same warning was issued about them

John B

Frank K. says:
April 16, 2012 at 9:20 am
Meanwhile, as Mann has yet another bad Twitter day…
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
The arctic sea ice is just NOT cooperating this year…
———————
It is well-known that Arctic sea ice is high at the moment. Don’t expect it to stay that way for long.
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
“Researchers do not expect the late maximum ice extent to strongly influence summer melt. The ice that grew late this winter is quite thin, and will melt rapidly as the sun rises higher in the sky and the air and water get warmer.”
Check back in September.
John

Eric Simpson

“How much lying/libel/deceit will Telegraph allow…” — M Mann. Ironic, as lying and deceit, as exemplified in the Hockey Stick, is the central modus operandi of Mann, and the others of The Chicken Little Brigade. Here’s my earlier comment in Real Science:
In 1993 the leftist Senator Tim Wirth said they should ride the agw issue even if the theory is wrong. Earlier, in ’89, Steven Schneider said that they should offer (make up) scary scenarios, saying that there should be a “balance” between telling the truth (ineffective) and lying (effective). Watson of greenpeace echoed this, saying “It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”
These type of statements suggesting that the scare mongers should lie and fabricate were certainly gaining esteem, and by the time Al Gore was running for president (and the H. Stick was fabricated) a critical mass must have been reached. Truth no longer mattered, and was in fact something to be frowned upon.
These intelligent elites thought of themselves as soldiers that were trying to save the world, or at least trying to further the laudable causes of de-industrialization and leftist global politics. The Chicken Little Brigade. They were the chosen, and the “little people” (the public) were too dumb or too ideologically impure to respect. Manipulating and deceiving the little people became the key to implementing their radical agenda, and that is what they became experts in (deception).
And in fact, they had many of us duped good, for a long time. The problem for them, though, is that now, with the CGate emails and Hide the Decline etc, their deceptive intent, and ideological motives, is clear as day. ALL their predictions of disaster, and ALL their models, have failed.
The wheels have fallen off their deception mobile. Yet these guys seem unfazed, moving apace like mindless automatons they roll out fresh baloney daily it seems, and new, but obviously false predictions of doom. A joke.