Three questions for Andrew Revkin and Michael Mann

UPDATE: 7:10PM PST Rather than answer the questions, I appear to have been blocked by Dr. Mann from viewing his twitter account. See below

Earlier today, this tweet exchange took place.

I found this curious. And it prompts me to ask these three questions:

1. If in fact Yamal was “largely” irrelevant, how then do you explain this graph?

One makes a hockey stick, the other does not.

2. If in fact Yamal was “largely” irrelevant, why then did CRU fight the FOIA requests, invoking a decision by the ICO? According to Steve McIntyre:

Phil Jones’ first instinct on learning about Climategate was that it was linked to the Yamal controversy that was in the air in the weeks leading up to Climategate. I had speculated that CRU must have done calculations for Yamal along the lines of the regional chronology for Taimyr published in Briffa et al 2008. CRU was offended and issued sweeping denials, but my surmise was confirmed by an email in the Climategate dossier. Unfortunately neither Muir Russell nor Oxburgh investigated the circumstances of the withheld regional chronology, despite my submission drawing attention to this battleground issue.

I subsequently submitted an FOI request for the Yamal-Urals regional chronology and a simple list of sites used in the regional chronology. Both requests were refused by the University of East Anglia. I appealed to the Information Commissioner (ICO).

A week ago, the Information Commissioner notified the University of East Anglia that he would be ruling against them on my longstanding FOI request for the list of sites used in the Yamal-Urals regional chronology referred to in a 2006 Climategate email. East Anglia accordingly sent me a list of the 17 sites used in the Yamal-Urals regional chronology (see here). A decision on the chronology itself is pending. In the absence of the chronology itself, I’ve done an RCS calculation, the results of which do not yield a Hockey Stick.

3. If in fact Yamal was “largely” irrelevant, why not advise your friends at CRU to release the previously existence denied regional chronology still being contested with the ICO?

In my opinion, Dr. Mann is untruthful about the relevance of Yamal tree ring chronologies.

If I’m wrong, sue me. I look forward to the discovery process.


UPDATE: It appears Dr. Mann can’t handle the questions, I posted this tweet to his account, as did another user “Decatur Alabama”. It was the first tweet ever to Dr. Mann (from WUWT).

Now what I get is this:

That “loading tweets seems to be taking awhile” is code for “you’ve been blocked”.

As Louis Gray points out:

Quietly updated with the ongoing rollout of #NewTwitter, it now looks like trying to view the timeline of someone who has blocked you no longer works. Instead of a list of their tweets, you see a white lie from Twitter that says “Loading Tweets seems to be taking a while”. In actuality, this means those tweets are not going to be showing up for you ever – at least until the other person unblocks you or you use a second account.

I’m betting those two tweets have been removed as well. Can anyone who hasn’t been blocked by Dr. Michael E. Mann confirm and supply a screen cap? Revkin seems to have removed the tweet I made to him as well.

In related news, I was surprised to discover that Dr. Mann has 3,105 followers and WUWT has 4, 645 followers. I suppose he can’t block all of them, can he?

UPDATE2: 8AM PST 5/8/12 Mann has removed both tweets as I predicted he would…note the yellow line I added demarcation of his tweet just prior to the ones on the three questions.

I’m thrilled!. I’ve made one tweet to Dr. Mann in my entire life, asking three relevant questions about his hockey stick science. He responds by blocking me and deleting the tweets. “Who’s the denier” now?

UPDATE3: 1:30PM PST some commenters suggest I’m not really blocked, but when I’m logged into twitter as “wattsupwiththat” and press the “Follow” button, I get this:

The Learn more link take you here:

They say…

Blocked users cannot:

  • Add your Twitter account to their lists.
  • Have their @replies or mentions show in your mentions tab (although these Tweets may still appear in search).
  • Follow you.
  • See your profile picture on their profile page or in their timeline.

newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Mike Smith

Mann won’t sue. But he won’t retract either.
The faithful will continue to believe (and cite) him as the Oracle.

Climate Acknowleger

Mann is a notorious Climate Denier.


@Revkin these are not the Droids you are looking for. Mike

Climate Acknowleger

Revkin paying tweets for opinions is hilarious.

Tom in indy

Inspection of that chart reveals the climate is characterized by a period of uninterrupted cooling for at least the last 1000 years. Captain America to Hulk – “Hulk, smash!”

Keith W.

Mann trying the Jedi Mind Trick. “These are not the treemometers you are looking for.”

Josh’s cartoon on this is going to show the hockey/non-hockey stick graph above, Briffa and Jones, halos somewhat askew, saying ‘We would never select or manipulate data in order to arrive at some preconceived or regionally unrepresentative result’ (with Mann as an angry demon whispering ‘it is just a molehill’ in Phil’s ear).


Dear Mr. Andrew Revkin,
I thought you were bright.
Do you expect an honest answer from anyone associated with Climategate?
Surely, you could ask someone, not even connected, what that graph means.
You’ve been pawnd so long…. and you go back for more????
1: You either like the pawning
2: You aren’t bright
Good luck with that.


Yamal is largely irrelevant but an increase of a few parts per million of CO2 will doom us all.


How long is Revkin going to go on embarrassing himself? One of theses days he is going to have to roll up his sleeves and actually read the Climategate documents.


Lost all respect for Revkin after the Gleick affair.


Mann is a notorious Climate Liar.


“mountain meet molehile” ? No, Mann meet derrier !

Climate Acknowledger

too much in a hurry to make fun, messed up my name…serves me right. That said, Mann, you’re a lying liar! 😀

Keith W.

Hiding in the dark, Mann sits stroking the core from YAD061, cooing softly to it, “Yes, Precious, you will be protected, you are the One tree to rule them all. McIntyres is mean and lies, we must make his lies go away.” /sarc


Perhaps it is time to relocate the RealClimate link from “Pro AGW Views” to the “Transcendent Rant and way out there theory” category.

Brian H

Revkin is proving that he’s the classic Dishonest Broker.

Steve McIntyre

Unlike the Guardian, Revkin sharply criticized Gleick.
Revkin is an excellent reporter. Just because someone holds different opinions than you doesn’t mean that they aren’t entitled to respect.

Joseph Bastardi

He wont answer as to why the Chinese find no hockey stick either.
Folks, take a look at this. I have showed this link many times, but it explains perfectly what the whole bunch of them are about. Confidence from ignorance of anything that challenges them

Steve McIntyre

Mann’s molehill link is a 2009 post discussed in my article. It accused me of “randomly” including the Khadyta River data, data now revealed to have been included in the withheld regional chronology. The no-dendro chronology in this post relied on upside-down contaminated Tiljander data and is worthless. Mann et al 2008 should have been retracted. Etc etc.

Climate Acknowledger

Thanks a lot for your work Steve, much appreciated. Mr.Bastardi, as usual, speaks the correct also.

Gail Combs

Steve thank you for all your hard work and tenacity.

If Revkin is an excellent reporter he will realize that being pointed to a three year old debunked post from realclimate is not an adequate discussion of new information obtained from a recently granted FOI request!


It’s an opportunity to plug the book!
Michael E. Mann ‏ @MichaelEMann
@Revkin I talk about Yamal & efforts by McIntyre to manufacture bogus controversy in “The Hockey Stick & Climate Wars”


May I suggest Climate Crooks as a handy handle for these soiled doves.

Not sure how to send the screen cap, but yes, your’s and Decatuer Alabama’s tweets are there in Mann’s twitter thing. I can’t see the tweet with the “mountain meet molehill” text though.


Steve McIntyre
I respect your knowledge,that’s all I can respect because I don’t know you. I do not respect Revkin’s knowledge, so what is there to respect? A journalist should be respected? Not in my world. This demanding of respect is all part of shutting people up. This man is worthy of respect so he should never be criticised. is that how it goes?
I do not like Revkin because I have seen some awful comments on his pages. Comments that he must be fine with, as he allows them to stand.
I could be wronging him, free speech and all that, but the comments do seem to lean one way.


“In related news, I was surprised to discover that Dr. Mann has 3,105 followers and WUWT has 4, 645 followers. I suppose he can’t block all of them, can he?”
He’ll get some poor grad student named Harry to do it.


I have always looked at Yamal with a jaundice eye.
When I saw this post, it made me think of this song.
Please forgive me!
I had to DJ in my college days 🙂



I made a PDF of ALL of Mann’s tweets, retweets, etc. – can I send you a link to it, Anthony?


re: Steve McIntyre’s link to Real Climate post of 09/30/09:
Why is it that every time I read something in the “public” discourse by Michael Mann it feels as though I’m hearing from a whiny adolescent??
There truly is something shocking and juvenile about Michael Mann’s public bearing, his petty snarky way of responding to reasonable questions and/or criticism.
Linking this 2009 article in a tweet, as a pretend response to new info and questions on Yamal, is truly contemptible. The whiny sarcasm of the RC 2009 post was bad then, and it hasn’t aged well at all. The fact that MM thinks this is an adequate response to Revkin now is extremely revealing.


Mr. Bastardi, I don’t think it is Dunning-Kruger. I think it is close to this, in my personal opinion:

Crispin in Waterloo

@Steve Mc
I read through your posts to catch up on the Yamal Yankee’s regional disinterest. Good sleuthing. Once tweaked to the obvious that they probably already calculated everything they could think of, it makes sense to look for traces of the suppression of what contradicted the great hope for CO2.
It seems that early on they took a WAGuess about what CO2 might do and have pressed on hoping that a random silver bullet of proof would find the bull’s eye. It took too long which left Mann to play Lone Ranger. He fired his best shot at removing the MWP but since then things have turned upside down and he has been unhorsed.
So in retrospect the saddle of the Lone Ranger is still empty, we thought. Your silver bullet seems to have in fact hit home. Glad to hear you are feeling better – perhaps the former is the result of the latter: you seemed wan; you’ve seen Yamal.


Steve McIntyre says:
May 7, 2012 at 7:33 pm
“Unlike the Guardian, Revkin sharply criticized Gleick.”
“It’s enormously creditable that Peter Gleick has owned up to his terrible error in judgment.”. Ooh, yeah, the enormously creditable Peter Gleick. Who still has not admitted the fabrication of the laughable “strategic memo”.
Sorry. Might be better than the Guardian. Still not credible. Won’t trust Revkin.


Mann is a piece of work – The pain and destruction he and his fellow liars and crooks have caused is unpardonable. One day they will be held to account. His friends and financial backers are slowly feeling the pinch, the money pit is running dry and so is the lie. it’s always about the money as history has shown us over and over again!

Michael Alexis

As of 12:02 am EDT, your tweet is still on Mann’s timeline.

Out of curiosity, Mann has degrees in applied mathematics and physics. Has he ever published any papers in the hard science fields outside of the (very narrow and specialised) climate sciences?


It appears Mann is reduced to publishing on Twitter. I wonder–are his tweets peer reviewed?


I’m following rather closely and have read through Briffa’s 2009 response ( In this he calculates a Yamal_ALL chronology – a counter to the claim that his isolated chronologies (i.e. alleged cherry picked) provide a distorted picture. With regard to this I note:
– his tree count for this max’s out at 75, compared to Steve’s almost 400 (current, 2009?).
– he does still produce a hockey stick. (goes without saying 😉 )
I’m curious if someone can respond, in a nutshell, why or how (his method isn’t detailed) he could still come up with a HS after including all — by his definition — of the trees?
And, with regard to the average calculations, when Briffa takes an average for multiple regions does he average all trees or average regional averages? (which could obviously explain large discrepancies)
And just as a comment, I find this focus on regions and/or research expeditions to be completely unscientific. When it comes to people like Briffa doing their work the region label should be thrown out in preference for scientific characterisations, geographic, biological etc, the fact that some guy went out to a certain region on a certain date doesn’t change the tree’s growth profile. Up to date studies should take this approach and provide an empirical basis for selection from the pool of samples. Of course spatial averaging and the like is completely valid, but should be explicit with everything else.


Given the Alexis (sp?) website comparative figures AW put up a few days back it would hardly be worth Mann doing anything on RealClimate , so few would be looking at it !! /sarc off

In my opinion, Dr. Mann is untruthful about the relevance of Yamal tree ring chronologies.
You’re too charitable — if Mann told me it was sunny outside, I’d go looking for an umbrella.

kadaka (KD Knoebel)

Mann shouldn’t know me from from Adam so I doubt you specifically are blocked. My used-once Twithead account gives me the same message.
But I was able to get his tweets.
From my Twithead homepage I searched for his account name. With his pic in the leftside “People” box, clicking on the pic brings up an annoying “page overlay” with his last three tweets, then you can click on “Details” for individual bird droppings. They’re also in the main Search results. Last three:!/MichaelEMann/status/199680096032927745

Kudos to State Farm for ending its association with the antiscientific Heartland Institute
10:00 PM – 7 May 12 via Facebook

Note: The URL’s are a LIE. Show one thing, on mouse-over show the same, but actual links are something else. Is using those “” fake links a Twithead “feature”?!/MichaelEMann/status/199616254955372545

MT @climateprogress @BBlakemoreABC ‘Hug The Monster’: Why So Many Clim. Scientists Have Stopped Downplaying Clim Threat
5:46 PM – 7 May 12 via web

Third is his already-mentioned upcoming Florida vacation where he and cohorts will discuss the urgent need to get someone else to pay for future upcoming vacations as well.
Curious. The media should make quite a deal of this upcoming “Florida Sea Level Rise Conference” in Boca Raton. The Tourism Board should be all over it, “Come see Florida while it’s all still here!” Intresting juxtaposition for Boca Raton as well. The expected drunk partying college students, and a conference with expected discussions on how to save the planet by enlisting the support of those future guardians of the environment.
Maybe a free six pack of “carbon neutal” organic beer for anyone driving a hybrid?

kadaka (KD Knoebel)

Posting Help Requested:
On my side, it looks like wordpress automatically “fills in” a tweet when I only post an URL. Never posted a tweet URL before, learned something.
Is there a way to post the URL by itself without the filling in? I carefully copied the text, and I know some people won’t be getting the “fill in”, using text-only browsers or Twithead might be blocked etc. So how do I make the URL a clickable item without the filling in?
Like this? Make it its own link? (testing…)


Oh no. Mann’s is to the notorious “Hey ya mal”-post at RC!
Every die hard warmist I’ve ever met refers to that post when I try to explain that the hockey stick is broken. It’s becoming really annoying. I think we need a point by point debunking of it once and for all to refer back to.
Should be quite easy, because the hockey sticks Gavin refers to either begin in the middle of the LIA or contain bad data (greybills or upside down tiljander). Even the Kaufmann-without-yamal is bogus, I think, since Gavin wrote this before Kaufmann issued a correction without the upside down series.


kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
May 7, 2012 at 10:29 pm
just re the URL shorteners, I don’t think that’s any nefarious issue, or at least not particular to Mann or climate science….
A lot of people like to use such “short” URLs, especially on Twitter where there is such a space premium for only 140 characters. It is distasteful that one does not see beforehand where the link will take you, so it depends upon whether you trust the person posting the link. Some of the issues are explained here:
I sometimes use tinyurl which has an option to allow a user to go to a “preview” page so they have some idea of what they are getting without actually getting to some different URL.

kadaka (KD Knoebel)

From Skiphil on May 7, 2012 at 11:00 pm:

just re the URL shorteners, I don’t think that’s any nefarious issue, or at least not particular to Mann or climate science….

No its not that issue, in this case, although not knowing where those short URL’s really go is annoying.
I mean this:
1st Mann tweet I mentioned:
Tweet says –
Actual URL –
Twithead swaps out the original posted URL, which can already be short, to somewhere else that then goes to the posted URL. From the ubiquitous “” usage I’ll guess that’s a tracking feature, although it does interfere with a simple right-click address copying.


As usual great sleuthing by Steve which exposes CRU’s mendacity. Let’s not forget the excellent work by Lucy, which confirms that the Yamal 20th century hockeysticks are bollocks of very dubious quality.


I suppose it is too obvious to suggest to those on twitter (the tw@teratti?) that this would be a great “I am Spartacus” moment to use the retweet option?


DaveG says: May 7, 2012 at 9:00 pm
“Mann is a piece of work – The pain and destruction he and his fellow liars and crooks have caused is unpardonable….”
Too right!
A billboard with Meltdown Mann’s ugly fizzog on would have been way more appropriate than Manson or the Unabomber. Who cares what the latter pair think? The thermaggedonists couldn’t have objected and the great mass of people (who have never considered the “consensus science”) wouldn’t have cared two hoots. But it would have cheered all those who have enquiring minds, at least. And, as a real bonus, Mann would have received the publicity he always craves but in a form that would seriously piss him off.
Mann is arguably already responsible for more pain & destruction than Manson & Unabomber put together. He just did it with his keyboard instead of conventional weapons.