This is hilarious, I finally got a retraction out of Dr. Michael Mann.
The AGW proponents must be reeling from McIntyre’s takedown of Marcott et al, because I watched the most hilarious smear genesis unfold this morning a few minutes after a note about McIntyre’s analysis was sent to Joe Romm of Climate Progress.
First, I sent this note to Romm this morning at 6:40AM PST. It was a little good-natured ribbing over Romm’s extrapolation of the Marcott hockey stick (in red):
I sent a one line note with a link to McIntyre’s latest:
I got his back almost immediately from Romm at 6:45AM PST:
Now you are denying the instrumental record, too?
This made me laugh, because neither Romm’s graph, nor Marcott’s, has the instrumental record in it, only Marcott’s reconstructed temperature and Romm’s red line “projected” add on. Plus, as McIntyre points out, Marcott et al did NOT splice on the instrumental record:
I have consistently discouraged speculation that the Marcott uptick arose from splicing Mannian data or temperature data. I trust that the above demonstration showing a Marcottian uptick merely using proxy data will put an end to such speculation.
Ten minutes later, at 6:55AM PST, this appeared on Dr. Mann’s Twitter feed:
Wait, what?
Coincidence? Maybe, but I don’t think so. Note Mann says “News Alert” and “now denying”, which implies immediacy. Of course since I am blocked by Mann on Twitter (as are dozens if not hundreds of people), I’m not allowed to post a response, so I have to do it here.
For the record, I don’t “deny” the instrumental record, but I do study it intently. For example, via this peer reviewed paper published in JGR Atmospheres of which I am a co-author:
Fall, S., Watts, A., Nielsen‐Gammon, J. Jones, E. Niyogi, D. Christy, J. and Pielke, R.A. Sr., 2011, Analysis of the impacts of station exposure on the U.S. Historical Climatology Network temperatures and temperature trends, Journal of Geophysical Research, 116, D14120, doi:10.1029/2010JD015146, 2011
Certainly it has gotten warmer in the last 100 years.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1912/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1912/trend
It also hasn’t warmed significantly in the past 15+ years, much like that period post 1945 to the late 1970s in the graph above:
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1997/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1997/trend
My view of the instrumental record is that it is clearly showing some warming, but as I point out many times, some of that warming trend is due to siting biases and adjustments.
Following the initial conversation, over the space of an hour, while starting to write this post, I communicated in several emails to Romm how his characterization of my “denial” of the surface temperature record was wrong, and how the Marcott et al graph he posted on Climate Progress had no instrumental record in it at all, only proxy data and projection:
And, “somehow” this must have been communicated to Dr. Mann, (and If Joe Romm sent my email along, I thank him) because up until this blog post there has been no public discussion here of my supposed “denial of the instrumental record”. Shortly after my last email to Romm at 8:35AM, Dr. Michael Mann, to his credit, tweeted this rare retraction at 8:58AM PST, though he just couldn’t resist getting another jab in:
Watching the reverse denial now of Marcott et al failings, I think we have entered the era of climate satire.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
RangerRick says:
March 18, 2013 at 12:13 pm
I agree. That’s why I’ve adjusted the CAGW acronym to demean them with my more accurate and damning version: Catastrophic Anthropogenic Genocidal Warmistas.
In the real world, these yokels are the ones killing millions of people world-wide by making life much more difficult than it should by. These “climate scientists” should be shunned and prosecuted. And they have the nerve to call anybody names–they’re the guilty ones!
” some of that warming trend is due to siting biases and adjustments.”
Can only be sustained for so long. Once the cherries are picked and the inconvenient truths erase, the trend will revert to whatever the trend actually is. I think we’re already seeing that happen.
squid2112 says:
March 18, 2013 at 10:11 am
“As for me, I look at it in a more positive way. I thank these climate fraudsters for opening my eyes and making me skeptical of everything, which is my recommendation to others. Trust no one, do your own vetting and seek the truth. I believe “climate science” has taught us all (those who wish to learn) this valuable lesson, which I believe needs to be taught and re-learned periodically.”
Agreed. It’s the Eugenics of our time.
Taking up on Richard M’s earlier comment, I look forward to the sequel to Mann’s book, “The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars” and suggest as a title:
“Decline and fall of the Romm-Mann Empire” – preferably written by Mckibben.
So… you are not denying the instrumental record of warming but you are still a climate change denier?
Got it — I like the logic behind the statement!
Our Mann outdid himself on that one. I think he acknowledged that you won the entire debate.
“Of course he is still a climate change denier waaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!!”
The towering Mann-child of the climate ‘science’ world.
I can hardly imagine what the scientists of even a single generation ago would make of the current crop of ‘scientists’. They are now indistinguishable from spoilt kids.
What happened??!!?
Michael D Smith says:
March 18, 2013 at 11:04 am
I wonder what metric prefix is typically used when measuring the thickness of Michael Mann’s skin… Zepto has a nice ring to it.
Groucho might be better…
Kurt in Switzerland says:
March 18, 2013 at 10:07 am
Wait!
I want to know more about the “Ladder of Denial”
…
—-
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2012/07/new-mccarthyism-described-by-climate-scientist-michael-mann/
near the bottom, apparently the ‘ladder of denial’ is the inexorable retreat of skeptics as CAGW unfolds. There probably is a cartoon in there somewhere. 🙂
I think what we are looking at here is a blatant attempt by Peter Clark OSU and his foot-soldiers, Marcott, Shakun and Mix to usurp the leadership (and grants) of the Team. They didn’t have to resort to the sordid ‘trick’ of tacking the instrumental record onto the proxy record ( an ‘uptickal’ illusion – with apologies to the genius on CA I stole that from). Clark and the New Team pulled their uptickal illusion straight from the data – way to go!
The Team is dead (or at least paralyzed wondering what to do); long live the New Team!
The fact that Romm and Mann are in such direct and immediate contact shows just how corrupt the science and the media in tandem with government have become. The people, the scientific institutions and the media have become one with propaganda being their tool of trade. There is little science (if any at all) left in it. It’s political chicanery of the worst kind. Journalists are not journalists but are political activists pretending to be journalists. Scientists are not scientists but are political activists pretending to be scientists. Environmental groups are not environmental groups but are political activists pretending to be environmental groups.
patrioticduo says:
March 18, 2013 at 2:49 pm
The fact that Romm and Mann are in such direct and immediate contact shows just how corrupt the science and the media in tandem with government have become.
…
———-
That doesn’t necessarily follow. They could be lovers for all we know; Romm could’ve shouted about Anthony’s message while Mann was in the shower. Of course I’m not saying they are, not implying that they are, I’m just pointing out an arbitrary example possibility that undermines the argument you’re making.
..
Maybe I could’ve chosen a different illustrative example. :p
Mark Bofill says:
March 18, 2013 at 2:55 pm
They could be lovers for all we know;
================================================================
Thanks, now that’s stuck in my head
Marcott’s paper had a fake hockey stick in it – Mann just got sentimental, it must have reminded him of the good old days when his nature trick was still a secret.
Although I no longer find such discoveries surprising, what concerns & disturbs me is the lack of coverage and the lack of genuine honesty among the scientists making such claims, “fudging” or deliberate leaving out of certain data sets, is the lack of oversight by the media. It also concerns me that media in general seem simply unable to follow a logical thinking pattern which would allow them to see through much of this hysteria and question warmists face to face when they make claims that are untenable. These “warmists” (what a horrid way of describing someone, I hate the way these people have made terms so common place in normal scientific & social discourse) get an east ride from the media. I recently heard an archived “discussion” between Marano & Mann on a BBC world service. This was several months ago. I have never, ever been so angry listening to Mann. He painted a picture that reminded me of the movie 1984. He claimed death threats, phone calls in the night, he played the part of the victim, making no factual arguments to refute anyone. He nullified any real cross examination by refusing an on air debate, trying to sell the victim persona to the BBC correspondent.
This is the future if this man & the rest of his quackademics are not derailed. Censoring of inconvenient data, smashing of public debate leading to policies which will be wrong, and it is me and my family who will suffer because of this. I hope this man realises that when this farce is ended, he will face serious jail time for his contribution to religion. Rant over.
Downdraft says:
March 18, 2013 at 1:26 pm
If/when the CAGW crowd realizes that Marcott et. al. is bogus, they will simply stop praising it. Rachel Maddow has verified the accuracy of Marcott. There will be no retractions, no apologies. The damage to science has been done.
———-
Now we will never convert her 12 viewers.
cn
Mann’s Twitter retraction might be something of a miracle. Luv the dig he still gets in about Anthony being a ‘climate change denier’…..
If ever there was a fitting use for it, Mann’s latest bit here begs to be called “rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic”.
This is a cri de coeur.
I don’t have a PhD, just GA Tech undergrad physics & math. I have been following the climate “science” debate for a number of years, and this absolute nonsense has finally reached a critical mass in my frontal lobes.
At this point, AGW, IPCC and all possible combinations and permutations are simply black-and-white academic fraud: “…an intentional misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage…” (cite: definitions.uslegal.com).
I’m willing to accept Dr. Mann and his ilk felt AGW was a reasonable null hypothesis 10-15 years ago (full disclosure: I once believed in the tooth fairy) . My current opinion is these guys now know the AGW hypothesis, and its collateral baggage, is invalid. Thus, the charge of academic fraud.
Academic enforcement of the “scientific method”, has failed; academic enforcement of free speech has failed and supposed academic resistance to money (aka: funding) has failed. None of this is too surprising because academia as a whole (not just selected individuals) is only occasionally on the front lines as a defender of the greater good – most time appears to be spent pursuing trivial banalities and funding.
What is truly dispiriting is the almost willful suspension of common sense by the average citizen. Our founding fathers placed great store in this group’s ability, as a whole, to understand reasonably complex concepts (eg; self-governance; jury duty) and ferret out unworthy ideas. However, despite all evidence to the contrary, it’s stunning how widely it’s accepted that polar bears are quickly going extinct.
For those of you worrying about the damage this fraud does to academia or science, I’d say the damage is well deserved: the group, as a whole, has not raised up to flush this unfortunate mess from the system by requiring full disclosure of data, algorithms, objectively peer-reviewed results, and free debate. Frankly, this group no longer deserves lavish tax-payer funding ($50B from USA Federal government alone over past 10 years; cite: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/112xx/doc11224/03-26-climatechange.pdf)
Richard Feynman must be sitting on a cloud somewhere wondering how so many supposedly well-educated practitioners have so grievously, now maliciously, lost their way.
Really! The battle for the future of mankind and misspent billions comes down to this?
I think we need to start labeling Mann the ‘Instrumental Record Denier’. Proclaim it everywhere, any time his name comes up.
mikemUK says:
March 18, 2013 at 2:13 pm
“Taking up on Richard M’s earlier comment, I look forward to the sequel to Mann’s book, “The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars” and suggest as a title:
“Decline and fall of the Romm-Mann Empire” – preferably written by Mckibben.”
This is the best of its kind I’ve seen on this site! Ed. Gibbon would even LOL.
DirkH says:
March 18, 2013 at 2:11 pm
squid2112 says:
“ … climate science has taught us all (those who wish to learn) this valuable lesson, which I believe needs to be taught and re-learned periodically.”
Agreed. It’s the Eugenics of our time.
—
False analogy. Eugenics has a sound scientific basis; at its core, it is nothing else but the application of the principle of selective breeding to the human race. This latter principle has been used widely and successfully to with domestic animals and crop plants, and I have not seen any scientific argument why this should not work with humans. The objections that keep us from using it are ethical in nature, not scientific.
First guy in a bar: “Have you heard the joke involving three climate scientists?”
Second guy in the bar: “No.”
First guy: “You have now.”
mikemUK says: March 18, 2013 at 2:13 pm
Taking up on Richard M’s earlier comment, I look forward to the sequel to Mann’s book, “The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars” and suggest as a title:
“Decline and fall of the Romm-Mann Empire” – preferably written by Mckibben.
Ha ha! I like that!
Michael D Smith says: March 18, 2013 at 11:04 am
“I wonder what metric prefix is typically used when measuring the thickness of Michael Mann’s skin… Zepto has a nice ring to it.”
David Chappell says: March 18, 2013 at 2:30 pm
“Groucho might be better…/em>”
Thank you both. How about zepto-Grouchometers?
sorry about not closing the [em] format. I will now.