In this priceless yet disturbing Twitter exchange with American Meteorological Society president Dr. Marshall Shepherd, Bishop Hill points out another case of Mann Overboard!
It started out innocently enough:
[Shepherd] learned n strange emails/blogs some disagree with my #Tedx Talk, @MichaelEMann HockeyStick discredited (hasn’t), & wx varies-gee “who knew”
[Bishop Hill] @DrShepherd2013 I attended a debate with a paleoclimate guy a few months ago. In q&a he was asked about hockey stick. He said “it’s broken”.
Here’s the full exchange:
Source: [ http://twitter.com/DrShepherd2013/status/343338700379389952 ]
– Bishop Hill blog – Sheep or shepherd?
Moments later, Shepherd blocked me.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
@Michael Palmer –
You’re overlooking something: when “the state” owns everything, what really is going on is that a tiny powerful elite owns everything (e.g., in Soviet Russia, where 9,000 nomenklatura controlled 99 percent of the economy of a country of 300 million people). There is really no difference between this and the Fascist corporate state, which very closely approximates what our own der Fuehrer is acting to create, with his crony capitalist buddies as the beneficiaries. They will get richer still while ordinary folk, and especially the poor people of this world, suffer from overpriced, unreliable energy.
Let’s not forget that Italian Fascism, and Nazism even more explicitly, were versions of socialism, with their ultimate roots also in Marxism. Nazi anti-Semitism was a formula obtained by equating the Marxist bourgeois class enemy with the Jews.
Michael Mann and Skeptical Science, it’s all explained here…
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/9/7/michael-mann-and-skepticalscience-well-orchestrated.html
Hmmm, evidence of digging a hole deeper. The last ones out will be left at the bottom, barely able to hear the others shout, “Hey, here’s another one!”.
Victor Hugo, Les Misérables, 1862
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même
Of course, the above would be better if I could spell “invalidating”!
Mango Chutney
And did Victor Hugo really say ‘thongs’?
tonyb
Those who really believe in what they are saying, even if they are obviously wrong or ignorant, at least try to argue in favor of their point of view.
Those who know that they are wrong, call others “trolls,” block them, explode in rants of incoherent invectives, or try some other means of evading the meaningful discussion or polluting it to the extent that any decent opponent has no other choice but to pinch his nose and “leave.”
Mann and his accomplices always try to silence their opponents; if they can’t, they simply run away.
“…fyi, I generally don’t debate anything that isn’t published in the peer-review lit, best regards…”
Too bad. Cook et al actually found that 66.4% of abstracts he looked at actually expressed no position on AGW, while only 32.6% endorsed AGW.
Seems to me he SHOULD debate those peer-reviewed papers that express no position in AGW.
JEM says:
June 8, 2013 at 2:49 pm
Sickening pity? It’s kind of the ‘Magic Christian’ question – what’s your price?
==============================
Eh?
Many people above commented on unusually cold conditions prevailing this year.
Here in the semi-arid southern foothills of San Juan mountains, this year’s spring was also unusually cold. Winter would seem to never end. However, last week every day in the afternoon was hot, while early in the morning it is still cold. The daily temperature differential is rather extreme: from 4 degrees C in the morning to 33 degrees C in the afternoon. That’s the temperature differential of almost 30 degrees C! That would be normal somewhere in Sahara or Gobi desert. Here in South Colorado the daily range of temperatures is usually about 10 degrees C narrower.
Robert of Ottawa says:
June 8, 2013 at 4:37 pm
Question:
Why did the USSR go along with, even encourage, Lysenko?
The simple answer is that he told them what they wanted to hear, not what was correct.
Robert of Ottawa says:
June 8, 2013 at 4:37 pm
Question:
Why did the USSR go along with, even encourage, Lysenko?
Because, you see, genetics (as well as cybernetics) was a “bourgeois science.”
Such was a consensus among the Soviet scientists at the time.
Those who paid their salaries (Stalin & Co.) didn’t like genetics.
Therefore, science was settled, and not debatable.
Deniers quickly ended up in labor camps or were summarily executed.
@climatereason
yes, of course, Hugo invented the thong 😉
(apologies, it’s early Sunday morning)
When Mann own ego final brings him down , the nature of some of the people who que up to kick him on the way down will be a surprise.
“I’m loving it” that Mann has to rely on SK/science for his defence 🙂
sunderlandsteve says:
June 9, 2013 at 2:12 am
“I’m loving it” that Mann has to rely on SK/science for his defence 🙂
How deep did “official” climate science sink, to rely on a proven unreliable site, which fabricates dialogue to fit the narrative, not on data and scientific refutation.
Ah, but wait, there is a certain pattern here…
OssQss:
Thanks, sorta, for posting the link to James Burke. If you follow it, you’ll find all of his Connections shows and other programs, posted by him. I’m watching them now.
Sadly, James Burke, who taught me via these programs to understand connections and the importance of history in science, is a vocal AGW believer. If only someone would make a “Connections” show explaining how this all began and where it is today.
. . . And all regress.
I don’t know, but to me this twitter exchange looks like standard operating procedure. Someone politely questions an aspect of the CAGW dogma, and the standard response is, “You’re wrong and if you can’t figure it out I can’t be bothered to explain it to you. Now go away and stop wasting my precious time.”
It’s all very boring and predictable.
“Together with his laughably lightweight TED talk, I wonder how long he will last in post?”
I’ve become a pessimist in this regard. Attorney General Eric Holder refuses to resign. John Holdren and his co-authors, the Ehrlichs, were famously wrong in their predictions of overpopulation and catastrophe and casually suggested all kinds of nasty measures might be needed to control population. Did Holdren ever have to pay for his idiocy and his cold-blooded policy possibilities? No, he became an editor of Science and now Obama’s chief science advisor. So, I think even if it cools for the next 20 years (or stays flat which is what happened from 1945 to 1980 or so), few will get the comeuppance they deserve. Funding may go down for warmist topics but these people will still be picked as science advisors for politicians and still be interviewed about their latest scare stories.
In Boston, the temperature didn’t even reach 60 degrees Friday (June 7), I had to wear a coat.
Hey Michael Mann — sticking my fingers in my ears did NOT make me feel any warmer, and it doesn’t make you seem more authoritative either.
paul s says:
June 8, 2013 at 5:46 pm
Why does this have to be about the Left???
They made it so. It fits with their overall agenda. The “science” is simply a convenience for them.
Margaret Hardman says: June 8, 2013 at 1:54 pm
:
Fair point. Dissenting voices have been swamped with scorn since the new moderation policy came in.
But float above that. It’s the empirical evidence and logic that sways the neutrals.
And only the neutrals matter. We diehards (on both sides) are a tiny minority. We may be right. We may be wrong. It makes no difference. Politically, only swaying the majority matters. And that means finding a channel to communicate empirical evidence and logic.
This is such a channel. Fear not, be rational and keep up the engagement.
(NOTE: I say this even though I have disagreed with most of your comments that I have seen so far. I support your engagement because you have been polite$-but-not-weak and consistent and, as such, worthy of respect).
Bruce Cobb says: June 9, 2013 at 6:45 am
No, it is not about the left-right division.
In the UK the right-wing has bought in to the green agenda in order to enforce conservative power structures…
By restricting entry into markets…
By raising energy prices…
By encouraging green energy taxes and subsidies for ‘green’ power sources.
This is completely different to the US. But the political forces work in alliance.
The world is not just one country.
Old science:
I’ve written a paper about ???
Let me read it.
Ok.
I think you may be wrong about this and this.
Really? I’ll look into it and discuss it with you further and release a better paper.
New science:
I’ve written a paper about ???
Let me read it.
Ok.
I think you may be wrong about this and this.
Block:
No Objections then? I must be right. The science is settled.