Friday Funny: Hilarious Mann email, IPCC icon 'pretty cool'

Chris Horner sends us another Michael Mann Email from the NOAA FOIA release. One should remember this statement from Dr. Mann before continuing:

Mann: ‘I always thought it was somewhat misplaced to make it a central icon of the climate change debate’

Hmmm. “Somewhat misplaced”, “pretty cool” and the stuff of prideful circulation, it’s all good but, well, which time were you telling the truth about icons?

The picture he was disapproving of/”thought it was pretty cool” as the IPCC icon…well, that is, apparently depending on to whom he is speaking, or what his needs of the moment are…was this, as you’ll see from the link he circulates with such pride and joy:

Now read the email: 

Mann circulated an email to his coauthors for MBH98 (Bradley and Hughes) to tell them about it:

I thought you might be interested in this, from today’s BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid 1130000/1130501.stm

Not to slight Sir John(!), but its actually the chart in the background I’m referring to 🙂

cheers,

mike

Hughes sent a humorous reply to Mann:

Highly cool! – pity about the ugly old guy in front!

Cheers, Malcolm

Mann replied with this:

Hey, that’s Sir John you’re talking about! And a fellow brit, no less! I thought it was pretty cool too. I’d like to know what he was saying about the chart!

Here is the original as a PDF: Mann thinks HS as IPCC icon pretty cool

Not earthshaking by any means, but it is funny. The earthshaking stuff will come out in the upcoming discovery for Mann -vs- NRO.

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
58 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jim G
August 25, 2012 8:57 am

Leo G says:
August 24, 2012 at 6:27 pm
“The iconic Sir John Houghton, patron saint of the Hockey Stick. His short briefing paper on global warming, climate change, and sustainability is worth a read. The latest version is probably still the 2009 one. It shows his obsession with eliminating the disparities of wealth between nations and his recognition that action on climate change was a means of achieving that goal.
Part of his argument in the essay:-
“Perhaps the most condemning of world statistics is that the rich are getting richer while the poor get poorer – the flow of wealth in the world is from the poor to the rich…”
“The moral imperative for the rich countries is inescapable…”
“Sustainability will never be achieved without a great deal more sharing.”
“… emissions should first be allocated to everybody in the world equally per capita, then transfer of allocations being allowed through trading between nations.”
How long was he co-chair of the IPCC? 14 years wasn’t it?”
The watermellon syndrome, if they are green on the outside they are usually red on the inside.

Steve Keohane
August 25, 2012 9:14 am

I came up with this at the end of an earlier Mannian thread, with the HS icon theme, perhaps here is more appropriate. http://i47.tinypic.com/2i7mfex.jpg

August 25, 2012 12:13 pm

Smith – SIr Peter Gluckman (Chief Science Advisor) is a pediatrician —
Born in Auckland, he attended Auckland Grammar School before studying paediatrics and endocrinology at the University of Otago gaining a MBChB in 1971. This was followed by MMedSc in 1976 and a DSc in 1987 from the University of Auckland.
He is the Professor of Paediatric and Perinatal Biology and was the Director of the National Research Centre for Growth and Development at the University of Auckland. He was formerly Head of the Department of Paediatrics and Dean of the university’s Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences as well as the founding Director of the Liggins Institute.
In 2007 he was appointed Programme Director for Growth, Development and Metabolism at the Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences. He also holds honorary chairs at National University of Singapore and the University of Southampton.
From the dreaded Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gluckman
And perhaps if you check into the background of the Prime Mincer [local joke] you might find him not such a nice guy. I personally have little time for derivatives money traders (http://www.indymedia.org.nz/article/76097/john-keys-finance-credentials).

Theo Goodwin
August 25, 2012 2:23 pm

See Bishop Hill’s site for an interesting discussion of several important emails:
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2012/8/25/fighting-mad.html

george e smith
August 25, 2012 8:17 pm

“””””…..Annette Huang says:
August 25, 2012 at 12:13 pm
Smith – SIr Peter Gluckman (Chief Science Advisor) is a pediatrician –
Born in Auckland, he attended Auckland Grammar School before studying paediatrics and endocrinology at the University of Otago gaining a MBChB in 1971. This was followed by MMedSc in 1976 and a DSc in 1987 from the University of Auckland…..”””””
Thanks for that research Annette. One of my high school graduating class chums got a DSc from UofA. That’s the only science doctorate, that I would want. Well I’m sure That Sir Peter dresses better than I do. AGS kids always looked spivvier than Otahuhu Technical High School kids, and I was among the lesser clad of those. But I still got my name on the wall.
Another of my class mates recently retired a Professor of Pediatrics, and Behavioral Psychology from the U of Miami; as did his wife. They may be the world experts on the learning processes of retarded children.
So Sir Peter could very well be deserving of his knighthood I think NZ is a leader in that field, and also Maternity issues; The Plunket Society and all that.
I think they are better at that, than climate.

RockyRoad
August 26, 2012 12:48 pm

RockyRoad says:
August 24, 2012 at 12:39 pm


(I’m a very patient man, Mr. Perlwitz–but we’ll see if your assertion of my “lack of logic” can be supported with a number and CI, as requested above. I’ve been looking for such a number and CI for years–you supposedly work in an organizaiton that should know it–should one exist. And no, dart boards [aka “models”] are NOT allowed.)
Again, ball’s in your court, Mr. P.
And if no number and CI is forthcoming, I take that as prima facia evidence that you are the one making a “logical fallacy” (your words, by the way).
We’ll see if what you claim has sufficient merit to be of interest.

It has been over 48 hours since I issued the above challenge to Mr. Perlwitz, and he has yet to respond–and all of it on a weekend free from work obligations, yet.
Mr. Perlwitz likes to call people names and disparage their comments, even impugning their character, but when asked to present a specific metric upon which the argument hangs, he fails to do so.
I repeat, Mr. Perlwitz fails to do so. He has nothing of sufficient merit that would withstand honest scrutiny.
I request an apology, Mr. Perlwitz, but considering how this whole CAGWCF meme is largely manufactured, your issuing an apology would be tantamount to admitting your complicity and subterfuge. Either way, your reputation is cooked: no number, no apology.
Sad, sad little man.