…and retweets from his phone:
Twitter / caerbannog666: CRU now uses NMS homogeniz
[Retweeted by Michael Mann] CRU now uses NMS homogenized data. Want NMS raw data? Ask NMS’s for it. WUWT’ers too dumb to figure that out.
Twitter / MichaelEMann: @edbegleyjr @B4Blast @Piac
@edbegleyjr @B4Blast @Piacats Right back at you Ed 🙂 Here’s the other photo. After a few drinks I think… pic.twitter.com/05N6lbmp
(Don’t blame me, if Dr. Mann wants to post publicly viewable pictures on his Twitter feed showing himself “after a few drinks” while simultaneously suggesting other people are dumb, who am I to argue?)
h/t to Tom Nelson
For the record, we know they use homogenized data at CRU, its the raw data we want. But Jones doesn’t want to share (more on this at Lucia’s here)Maybe if we get a few drinks in him?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It’s nice to know he reads WUWT every day though!
And he got his apostrophes the wrong way round… it should have read ‘want NMS’s raw data?…ask NMS for it.’
And WTF are WUWT’ers? The ‘ers’ of WUWT maybe???
Moral: Don’t post when you’re angry and drunk.
[snip – over the top – sorry – Anthony]
Well Dr Mann (since we now know he’s reading this blog, may as well address the comments to him directly) can I ask you to explain how asking the NMS’s for their data will tell us what data Jones used? If the NMS’s respond, how do we know what they supplied us with is the same as what they supplied Jones with? How do we know Jones even used what they sent him? How do we know that when Jones converted from the format they sent him to the format he uses for his own analysis, that he did so correctly? How do we know without seeing all the data directly from Jones that some of the data he used didn’t come from sources other than what he has listed?
When you are done answering those questions Dr Mann, could you also explain your argument that only you can understand your emails? I’d really like to know that if you believe this to be true, why you would bother sending emails to other people in the first place knowing that they couldn’t understand them anyway?
What an arrogant twit he is! Ed Begley Jr – not the sharpest knife in the drawer, either.
Hey Anthony – this article is tagged as humor so that snip is not fair…
REPLY: There’s humor, and there’s over the top humor which will be used against you. Yours was the latter. – Anthony
Is that “peer-reviewed” Ed Begley hugging the chubby logic-chopper?
The Carbon Cultists often try to claim that they’re not in it for the glory or the status, they’re just humbly serving science. Mmmmm-hmmmm.
How else would an unglamorous academic like Mann get to pal around with supercool Hollywood types?
much amusement, including charles’ “penny-pinching” which in fact was rightly called out as hypocrisy:
3 June: SMH: Cosima Marriner: Green fatigue
While consumers are losing interest in the environmental impact of daily living, the corporate world is increasingly exploring how sustainable projects can make good business sense.
When Prince Charles boasted of his environmentally friendly lifestyle recently, it didn’t come across quite the way he intended. His preference for wearing extra clothes rather than turning up the palace heating, his efforts to recycle old bathroom curtains into cushion covers, and the way he throws his bathwater on the garden at Highgrove, were all derided in the media as ”penny-pinching”…
The carping about the carbon tax and the tedious to-ing and fro-ing over whether climate change is real have distanced the problem from everyday life. The challenge now is to bring ”green” back to a personal context.
And the business world – traditionally the enemy of the environment movement – is leading the way as the economics of sustainability stack up.
Being green has become ”almost too big now ” for consumers, argues the author of What’s Mine Is Yours: How Collaborative Consumption Is Changing the Way We Live, Rachel Botsman.
”It’s become a political issue. People find it really hard to relate to,” says Botsman, a former adviser on sustainability to Bill Clinton. ‘…
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/green-fatigue-20120602-1zohr.html
Charles Gerard Nelson says:
June 2, 2012 at 4:02 pm
And he got his apostrophes the wrong way round… it should have read ‘want NMS’s raw data?…ask NMS for it.’
And WTF are WUWT’ers? The ‘ers’ of WUWT maybe???
Moral: Don’t post when you’re angry and drunk.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I am sorry but you are wrong. Mann’s apostrophes are not possessives. They are mistakenly placed when he wants to pluralise NMS. However, just as the plural of cat is cats, the plural of NMS is NMSs. No apostrophe is needed. Mann is making the same mistake that Anthony made in his earlier post.
The correct rendition of Mann’s tweet would read “want NMS raw data?…ask the NMSs for it”. If the abbreviation is confusing, substitute ‘laboratory’ for ‘NMS’ . . . “want laboratory raw data?…ask the laboratories for it”.
Again, the apostophe in WUWT’ers is an error. Just as a footballer is someone who indulges in football, a WUWTer is someone who indulges in WUWT. Mann is following modern practice of scattering apostrophes about like confetti at a Californian wedding.
As one of just 175 people in my own country – and fewer than 15,000 worldwide – who understand the correct placement of the apostrophe in all cases, I carry a heavy burden but try to assist when and where I am able.
OMG, is he for real? When people are wrong or can’t support their arguments, they tend to become louder and louder, not to mention the rudeness factor. I’ve even seen this in myself when I’ve been wrong; OK, that has only happened once. I thought I was wrong about something. Turns out I wasn’t. 😉
cheers,
gary
Oops, I should have mentioned that was in response to the Begley interview. Damn, that makes twice.
g
Homogenized? Raw?
Is that a milk bar he’s in?
davidmhoffer says:
June 2, 2012 at 4:09 pm (Edit)
Well Dr Mann (since we now know he’s reading this blog, may as well address the comments to him directly) can I ask you to explain how asking the NMS’s for their data will tell us what data Jones used? If the NMS’s respond, how do we know what they supplied us with is the same as what they supplied Jones with?
#####################
The data Jones uses is posted. You can go grab it directly or you can use the R package I wrote to go get the data.
Then, you look at his flags which indicate the sources.
Take canada for example. You can go to the canadian site and download the data which they provide. You can then compare it with Jones version of the data.
If you are really curious you can go download all the raw canadian data and compre that to the homogenized data. I’ve got a package for that as well.
Again, its perfectly fine for Jones to use homogenized data. he posts his data. he posts the sources where he got it. You can check the two if you like. Its tedious work. I suspect you are not up to doing it. But the tools exists. They are freely available.
Thanks Graphite. Mann’s too dumb to know when it is appropriate to throw stones.
Mark
“For the record, we know they use homogenized data at CRU, its the raw data we want. But Jones doesn’t want to share.”
This is rather the point here. What raw data do you want? And what makes you think Dr Jones has it available to share? He’s sharing the data he obtained and used.
REPLY: No it isn’t the point, apparently you missed the update on the original comment that started this row. Recall that CRU/UEA lied about having emails on a backup server too, and we all know how that went. Why should we trust CRU/UEA when they say “we don’t have it” when they’ve been caught out before?
It blows my mind that people like Jones and yourself argue against having all data for full reproducibility.
BTW when are you going to come clean on being totally taken in by the ANU death threats thingy…or are you going to ignore it like an FOI request?
– Anthony
FergalR says:
June 2, 2012 at 4:19 pm
“Is that “peer-reviewed” Ed Begley hugging the chubby logic-chopper?”
What the…? He’s wearing the exact same outfit as he does in the twitter photo! What’s my point? None really… Just found that a little odd.
“Leave Zealots alone, for they are humorless, and to be objects of pity,not scorn.”-unkn.
Now in other warmist news:http://ca.news.yahoo.com/clinton-arctic-see-impact-climate-change-151737949.html Hilllary says: “I’m melti..er It’s melting!!…”
Don’t care about the homogenized data. Just want to know who has the raw data. If tax payers paid for raw data collection, there should be raw data available. So who has it?????? And if it isn’t available, heads should roll, pet projects cut, and people should lose their jobs. What is stupid about a tax paying citizen inquiring as to how the #@ur momisugly$% money was spent and where the hell is the raw product we paid for?
I took a brief look at page http://www.scribefire-next.com/edbegleyjr#ld . I’m not sure what that page is supposed to be, it looks like a “parked” domain, but one of the “Sponsored listings” read “Stumble with Friends/ It’s always more fun to Stumble with friends.”
Interesting that Ed had same clothes from Mann’s tweet and on Fox News.
Twitter / caerbannog666: CRU now uses NMS homogeniz
[Retweeted by Michael Mann] CRU now uses NMS homogenized data. Want NMS raw data? Ask NMS’s for it. WUWT’ers too dumb to figure that out.
================
So, education was never your strong suit ?
Steven Mosher says:
June 2, 2012 at 4:45 pm
The data Jones uses is posted. You can go grab it directly or you can use the R package I wrote to go get the data.
————————————————————————
Can you please explain the following? I have tried asking in the UK to no avail.
“Global-average annual temperature forecast”
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/seasonal-to-decadal/long-range/glob-aver-annual-temp-fc
At the bottom of the page is:-
Figure 3: The difference in coverage of land surface temperature data between 1990-1999 and 2005-2010. Blue squares are common coverage. Orange squares are areas where we had data in the 90s but don’t have now and the few pale green areas are those where we have data now, but didn’t in the 90s. The largest difference is over Canada.
Why did the MO not have the Canadian land surface temperature data 2005-2010? I am not aware of any of the stations being closed during that period? And obviously they are operating OK now. But if they were closed during that period could somebody please point me in the right direction?
How can a data source that portrays to be representative appear to choose what stations to include or exclude and or subsequently re-introduce?
Ironic coming from a man who used an upside-down proxy in a published paper….
As one of just 175 people in my own country – and fewer than 15,000 worldwide – who understand the correct placement of the apostrophe in all cases, I carry a heavy burden but try to assist when and where I am able.
=============================================
“BUT THERE’S A CONSENUS!”
(Oops. Sorry. Wrong argument.)
It’s tough to remember the correct placement of apostrophes. Its nice to know that someone out there is willing to help.
(I know I got at least one of those right.8-)