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: https://support.twitter.com/articles/117063#
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.
Maybe I am being simple-minded about this…
“If in fact Yamal was ‘largely’ irrelevant” one question I would have is why in the ‘hide the decline” discussion in the Climateagate emails, Michael Mann leaned on Keith Briffa so hard to not give any mixed signals (by showing the decline in Briffa’s data), when if Mann’s reconstruction was definitive all he had to do was argue HIS data (which shows a steep incline in the 1990s) over Briffa’s (which showed a decline in that same period) and try to make Briffa use Mann’s instead of Briffa’s. Or to add in Mann’s choice of Yamal data.
I say this because the Divergence Problem (DP) certainly doesn’t show up in Mann’s Yamal-inclusive data. If the subject was connected with the DP, where is Mann’s argument that there IS no DP? His graph shows none, but how could he be showing no DP when every dendroclimatologist out there knows there IS one? If the DP exists – and it does – no proxy graphs should show anything else. (Multi-proxies might not, but tree-rings should – which was Briffa’s work, as far as I understand it.)
Steve Garcia
I don’t listen to Michael Mann anymore. He isn’t credible. Just moving on to science…leaving him behind in the dustbin. Same thing happened to Fred Hoyle. Fred could not deal with the fact that he was wrong about the big bang. Who is Fred you say? Exactly my point. The Space telescope wasn’t called the Hoyle. It was called the Hubble.
Who was Michael Mann? He was that guy who played hockey for Penn State. Right?
I just lost my comment, dammit. I was logged in and WordPress asked me to log in again. Every time it does that, I lose my comment. It only does that every now and then, and with no warning. And stupid me, I forget to copy-clip before hitting . Screw it.
[I copy and hold till the comment appears . . frustrating I know . . kbmod]
“I appear to have been blocked by Dr. Mann from viewing his twitter account.”
I’m surprised that he didn’t report you as a spammer. That seems to be SOP for a certain segment of the Twitterati these days.
Some comments are sort of self-pwning.
/Meta
Matt Skaggs there is perhaps a simpler explanation, Mann and the IPCC needed the numbers to produce a result which was ‘useful’, so he came up with a way to do this which actually did not depended on the reality of the data.
From virtually day one the ‘Hockey stick’ was a political piece of work not a scientific one, it later became a religious ‘Icon’ for ‘the cause’, to be defended onto death.
Much of the behavior of climate scientists makes sense once you drop the word scientists and use the word ‘faithful’ instead, the very idea of deniers finds a far happier home in any church than it will ever do in any lab.
larrygeiger says:
May 8, 2012 at 3:56 am
Oh no! He’s coming to Florida. To talk about “sea level rise”. A subject that I’m sure he’s an expert at.
.
.
.
Oh, wait. It’s okay. He’s going to Boca. That’s not really Florida. Whew!
__________________________________
Darn it is too late for a snow storm and too early for a hurricane…. Think someone could lure him into the Loxahatchee Wildlife Refuge where Mother Nature in the form of an alligator or jaguar might take pity on the world?….. NAH, they would get too ill.
When you can no longer defend your position you have two options: surrender or run away. Looks like he ran away.
Reminds me of this one.
hunter says:
May 8, 2012 at 8:18 am
Sooner or later we are going to see the e-mails Mann is fighting so desperately to see. Eventually the third and largest tranche of clmategate e-mails is going to be released.
Both of these data groups are unlikely to help Mann or the rest of his team. All we need to do is encourage Mann and his pals to be themsleves, stick to the high ground, and keep on pointing out the holes in AGW extremism.
______________________________
Let’s just hope the Regulating Class has not implemented complete control by then. They are getting frighteningly close.
Anthony,
[i]That “loading tweets seems to be taking awhile” is code for “you’ve been blocked”.[/i]
When I used Twitter regularly I used to get that message or a very similar one quite frequently, most often when trying to log into my own account. I therefore wouldn’t take it for granted that you have been blocked.
REPLY: I didn’t, I tested using the “Follow button” I’m blocked for certain – see results added to the post in a few minutes – Anthony
kadaka,
[i]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 “t.co” fake links a Twithead “feature”?[/i]
Yes, short links are used to help tweets fit into the character limit. There’s no reason to be upset about them. Most web users will know that browsers usually allow one to mouse over any link and see the actual URL.
kakada,
re my previous post: sorry, I was mistaken about those links. I seem to remember mousing over Tiny links and seeing the actual URL but I must have been mistaken.
Mann’s self-serving overconfidence and aggressive arrogance appear to be compensation for his lack of self-esteem and for his self-knowledge of the well audited and publically known problems with his science.
I thank McIntyre for being such a prolific contributor to the audits of Mann’s work.
John
Michael Mann is well on his way out of science and into full-time advocacy. He will tread the path worn by Gleick and Hansen. Wealthy moonbat ladies of a certain age will donate money to his cause, and coo over his every word on the lecture circuit, where they will keep him, like a pet.
I rip so many places apart with the questions to stop any group of warmers involving the simple explanation for why they thought Mike Mann’s Math was real and why everyone they know thought it was real,
and why, everyone they know, CAN’T TELL a TREE isn’t a HEAT SENSOR.
I just did a flyover at Ars Technica and lit em up with that simple formula: asking people to explain in a way that wouldn’t make coffee shoot out people’s noses onto keyboards, what their personal explanation to me is
for those phenomena.
Priceless.
Congrats Anthony,
You turned Michael Mouse into a sulking denier!
Matt thanks for responding. His 75 count total is a clue, so it’s likely as you say that a filter process has been quite hockey stick hungry. Steve has his code and data sources posted in his blog, no such from the Briffa.
I keep telling you people, they are not “tweets” they’re “twits”. Mann proves it every time.
Nobody else seems to have suggested it, so let me be the first. Let’s put out and sell: a ‘Michael Mann blocked me on Twitter’ t-shirt.
Here’s a precedent: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/liberal-candidate-threatens-facebook-users-over-satirical-article-20120508-1y9v3.html
Piltdown Mann
Well worth reading Andrew Montford’s summary of the Yamal problems at Bishop Hill Blog:
Excellent Summary of Yamal Issues at Bishop Hill
One has to wonder how much the Yamal problems influenced the first release of the Climategate emails (reasonable speculation: quite a lot!!).
Sorry. I haven’t read every comment, but just when does Mann say Florida is going to be the next Tuvala?
I’ve tried to read and understand this story but it seems to have become very jumbled and confused. I thought it was something to do with Steve McIntyre’s excellent work on Yamal (interesting), but it is now all about Michaela Mann’s twitter account (boring and trivial)
Any chance we can get back to the real strong coffee, not just the froth on the top, please?
Responding to my own question, re Briffa’s Yamal_ALL. Steve does comment on this very topic in his post:
[quote]
As shown above, there are obvious and visible difference between the regional and Yamal chronologies. However, in their website response to Climate Audit in October 2009 and to their submissions to Muir Russell, CRU claimed that there was little difference between their Yamal chronology and a chronology using “all the data”. How can these contradictory claims be reconciled?
The graphic below shows compares core counts of CRU’s “all the data” (violet) to the core counts of the Yamal-Urals regional chronology that CRU had calculated in 2006. Evidently, contrary to their representations, CRU did not use “all the data” after all.
[/quote]
His Figure 5 shows core counts with violet “CRU 2009” having a max count of about 75, so that should be it.
I’m wondering what you’re reading, because neither Tuvala nor Tuvalu have been mentioned in this thread. It is however unlikely that Florida will do anything like disappear off the map, unless we get an order of magnitude or more than Al Gore’s prediction.