Steve McIntyre is back blogging and writes (links mine):
I had also spent some time considering a response to Mann’s book. It amazes me that a reputable scientific community would take this sort of diatribe seriously. Mann’s world is populated by demons and bogey-men. People like Anthony Watts, Jeff Id, Lucia, Andrew Montford and myself are believed to be instruments of a massive fossil fuel disinformation campaign and our readers are said to be “ground troops” of disinformation. The book is an extended ad hominem attack, culminating in salivation in the trumped up plagiarism campaign against Wegman, arising out of copying of trivial “boilerplate” by students (not Wegman himself). Wegman’s name appears nearly 200 times in the book (more, I think, than anyone else’s).
Virtually nothing in its discussion of our criticism can be taken at face value. Mann begins his account by re-cycling his original outright lie that we had asked him for an “excel spreadsheet”. Mann’s lies on this point had been a controversy back in November 2003. The incident was revived by the Penn State Investigation Committee, which had (anomalously on this point) asked Mann about an actual incident. Instead of “forgetting”, as any prudent person would have done, Mann brazenly repeated his earlier lie to the Penn State Investigation Committee. Needless to say, the “Investigation” Committee didn’t actually investigate the lie by crosschecking evidence, but accepted Mann’s testimony as ending the matter. In the book, instead of leaving well enough alone, Mann once again re-iterated the lie.
Steve’s full essay is here.
One only has to read Mann’s latest whine over at Climate Progress to know that Steve McIntyre is spot on.
Related articles
- Jolis Reviews Mann (climateaudit.org)
- Mann of the people (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Ambler’s rebuttal to Mann in the Wall Street Journal (wattsupwiththat.com)
- Booker mentions Mann – Mann has a Twitter tantrum (wattsupwiththat.com)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Phil Clarke says:
April 24, 2012 at 12:17 am
‘Compare and Contrast.’
McIntyre: Honesty and integrity
Mann: Manipulation and self-interest.
How’s that Phil?
As a reader of thinkprogress who does end up arguing with some of the excessive liberals I must say that I’ve mostly avoided the climateprogress section because there are some real loons there. Some of those folks are crazy.
Brian,
If by “some of those folks” you mean “most all of those folks”, I agree. They are truly nuts.
To JEM:
You could try an Inter Library Loan (ILL) if you have access to a local public or college-level library that participates. Often, there is no charge, and if there is one, it is used by your local facility to cover the costs of shipping the book to-and-fro.
That keeps any profit out of Mikey’s grubby-little hands, and accomplishes your goal.
Hope that helps,
Mark H.
@Phil Clarke
Why is McIntyre mentioning this episode at all? It isn’t apropos of nothing, it’s apropos of Mann’s extensive whining on that specific point in his own book. Who’s obsessed again?
From a part of Mann’s response on CP: (emphasis mine)
“Using what we call proxy data – information gathered from records in nature, like tree rings, corals, and ice cores – my co-authors and I pieced together the puzzle of climate variability over the past 1,000 years.”
I think that says it all. take a little from here, take some from there and make it all fit together nicely to show the fantasy of CAGW.
And get this comment:
“2.prokaryotes says:
April 23, 2012 at 3:25 pm
Also relevant
Climate deniers should be TRACKED and made to pay ‘when the famine comes’, says inflammatory climate columnist http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2133771/Columnist-says-global-warming-skeptics-houses-burnt-down.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
The Daily Mail seriously has a hard time keeping a balanced coverage. However, the paid deniers really play a risky game, when putting us literally all in harms way.”
These people are really wacked, the paid deniers are putting us in harms way? Alarmists want to track us down.
First and last article I’ll read on CP, the only thing boiling is my blood!
Michael Mann says:
Enough said, I think.
Phil Clarke says:
April 24, 2012 at 12:17 am
Meanwhile, back in the reality-based community, the EGU have awarded Professor Mann the well-deserved Oeschger medal and later this year he is to be made a Fellow of the AGU.
Well there exist metaphysical theories that say “you create your own reality” . In my reality the prestige of EGU and AGU bottomed. People who give prizes and distinctions to Mann show their ignorance of the scientific method and of physics and statistics in particular. If the G is for Geological, I hope the young ones dethrone the pals who distribute favours to pals.
Last line in the 10th paragraph in Mann’s ” whine over at Climate Progress”:
” Those gases are acting like a heat-trapping blanket around the planet.”
How can a supposed climate scientist still make this silly analogy.
Compare and contrast Mann with McKintyre….
Well whatever the local dislike of Mann the reality is he is a leading scientists with over 50 peer reviewed scientific papers to his name, wide acclaim in the field and highly cited.
Whatever the local support for McKintyre he has … One paper to his name, highly cited, but mainly to dispute its findings. He is not regarded as a scientist in the field, just a mathematician who made some criticisms of a new methodology of climate reconstruction. It is notable that he has never contributed, or participated in any constructive research, his contribution has not been to expand the horizons of human knowledge…
In reference to Wegman, it was the publishers who retracted his paper, mainly for the Wiki plagiarism, the block (mis)quotes from Bradley and the inadequacy of the social network analysis.
What is often forgotten is that while Wegman repeated the criticism that McKintyre had made of the PCA method (with some of the same mistakes) he did acknowledge that the statistical methodology makes no difference to the validity of the paleoclimate reconstruction. All other reconstructions since (there have been many) confirm the original MBH98 work, I don’t think any have returned results outside the error range found in the original Mann reconstruction.
This sample of Mann’s book reminds me of what one expects to find from the Marxist world view when confronting intellectual opponents.
Mann has been called a liar by McIntyre. I recall the Mann said he is ready to take people to court. I await Mann’s response to being called a liar.
As for:
Has Michael Mann ever come over to WUWT? If he has he will notice a couple of ‘red flags’.
*Google Ads
*Shameless Plug Donations accepted: fling funds
*Wordpress
*Donate to help keep the http://www.surfacestations.org project going
*WUWT Stuff
and other revenue generating items
Does this sound like a fossil fuel, well funded climate denialist machine? You can have a PHD but it doesn’t stop you deluding yourself. 🙂 As for ‘disinformation’ all I read is about actual observations and a sceptical look at Warmists claims. I thought that’s how science kinda worked. Silly me.
“our readers are said to be “ground troops” of disinformation”
Well, I was an Marine Infantry Officer when I was a younger man. I think that qualifies me to be a ‘ground troop’, doesn’t it?
“Why is McIntyre mentioning this episode at all? It isn’t apropos of nothing, it’s apropos of Mann’s extensive whining on that specific point in his own book. Who’s obsessed again?”
Hardly. It is a single footnote on page 263 (Kindle edition). It is not even a good whine – Mann said the data was supplied in ‘a spreadsheet version’, in fact it was a csv file. Click on a csv file on most PCs and it will open in Excel. This does not even rise to the level of a nitpick. I ask again – is that it?
Icarus62 says: April 24, 2012 at 4:00 am
Michael Mann says:
“As a climate scientist, I have seen my integrity perniciously attacked, politicians have demanded I be fired from my job, and I’ve been subject to congressional and criminal investigations. I’ve even had death threats made against me. And why? Because I study climate science and some people don’t like what my colleagues and I have discovered.”
Enough said, I think.
To a thinking person, he has no integrity, there is none be attacked, and he should be fired. The man is delusional about the tide of a funded conspiracy against him.
Thank you, Steve McIntyre and Anthony for all you have done to expose this charlatin.
@Phil Clarke
You left out that Yassir Arafat and Barack Obama have Nobel Peace Prizes and all the children in Lake Woebegone are above average.
/How’s the weather in your echo chamber?
Mann’s book is a must-buy for psychology students, at least. What a case-study.
izen said
What have you been smoking?”
Jimbo says:
April 24, 2012 at 4:30 am
> Mann has been called a liar by McIntyre. I recall the Mann said he is ready to take people to court. I await Mann’s response to being called a liar.
I doubt that’s going to happen. He may have expected Tim Ball to roll over and pay the fine, but with financial support from the skeptic community, Mann is discovering he may have to turn over important Email during discovery.
He won’t sue McIntyre – discovery should destroy Mann’s claims.
It would be entertaining, though!
Phil Clarke says:
April 24, 2012 at 12:17 am
“Meanwhile, back in the reality-based community, the EGU have awarded Professor Mann the well-deserved Oeschger medal and later this year he is to be made a Fellow of the AGU.
Compare and Contrast.”
No doubt he will be selected as the new Chairman for the Task Force on Scientific Ethics.
Bernie Madoff at one time was the Chairman of the Board of Directors of NASD.
Compare.
Michael Mann is not a scientist because he fails to follow the scientific method. He doesn’t analyze data and draw a conclusion, he adjusts the data to fit his hypothesis. Likewise the other alarmists who are trying to drag this world back into the dark ages.
Image: Mann is holding a flaming hockey stick, the stick is burning from both ends.
Dilemma, Mann is thinking: -“Should I let go of the stick or keep holding it?”
Bill Tuttle says:
April 23, 2012 at 9:36 pm
…and our readers are said to be “ground troops” of disinformation.
That implies that we’re in lock-step with everything. The only military organization I can think of that would be analogous to the multidisciplinary skills and knowledge WUWT readers bring to the fight is a Special Ops regiment.
————————————–
I’ll second that. Whoops…
Mann is to science what Steve’s home town Leafs are to hockey.
@- DR
Do you have an example of a paleoclimate reconstruction that gives results outside the error bars of the MBH original work, or are you just sneering at the claim that none have without justification?