Robert Scheaffer reports from the meeting via email:
Mann just told TAM (The Amazing Meeting of the Skeptics Society) that there has been no pause in Global Warming, and says claims that there has been are just ‘Cherry Picking’.
Also he used Marcott et al. as proof that his Hockey Stick is valid.
Surely he must know that the authors themselves disavow that conclusion!! Like a creationist, he uses arguments he knows to be false, but the audience doesn’t.
He did not take any questions, however very few of the other speakers did either.
Hopefully we’ll have video to post here soon.
No word yet what Penn and Teller think.
UPDATE: here is a photo of James Randi and Mike Mann. Mike looks a bit starstruck.
This might make a good caption contest.
UPDATE2: I’m actually in Houston tonight, and dashed off this posting earlier on my way to a meeting, and in my haste neglected to mention that the report was from Robert Scheaffer, one of the speakers there and I added the links to WUWT articles. That oversight has since been fixed. The photo above is also his. -Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
If, as Mann asserst, there has been no pause in warming then:
With apologies to Charles Dodgson.
For asserst please read asserts.
My bad.
Agree with Don and Alvin. Was your creationist jab really necessary?
We all know “Climate Change” happens (the climate is always changing) and we all know “Creation” happened (we’re here aren’t we), we also know both were/are highly chaotic un-modelable events.
@Don says: July 13, 2013 at 5:00 pm, I’m a creationist like Don.
I’m not a creationist but was taken aback by Anthony’s stereotype as it seemed so out of character. My first reaction was to recheck the byline to ensure the post was from Anthony and sure enough it was. What gives? Bad habit to fall into, my friend.
@Jeff C, see update#2 above. This was my error in haste for not giving attribution to the source of the report, since rectified.
The Randi Forum is anything but skeptics…..
it is basically Media Matters for global warming fanatics.
Mann cherishes his role as an Alarmist Rock Star. If he ceased the Big Lie, what would he be?
He’s not alone unfortunately
““A decade is the minimum possible timeframe for meaningful assessments of climate change,” said WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud. “WMO’s report shows that global warming was significant from 1971 to 2010 and that the decadal rate of increase between 1991-2000 and 2001-2010 was unprecedented. Rising concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases are changing our climate, with far reaching implications for our environment and our oceans, which are absorbing both carbon dioxide and heat.”
“Natural climate variability, caused in part by interactions between our atmosphere and oceans – as evidenced by El Niño and La Niña events – means that some years are cooler than others. On an annual basis, the global temperature curve is not a smooth one. On a long-term basis the underlying trend is clearly in an upward direction, more so in recent times” said Mr Jarraud.”
http://www.wmo.int/pages/mediacentre/press_releases/pr_976_en.html
“Maybe Ryan can explain why The Economist, and the NY Times, and even über-alarmist Phil Jones all admit that global warming has stopped. ”
Because they’re not including oceans. And the Jones quote is lifted out of year context. You know, like creationists do.
Ryan, will the oceans warm enough to prevent the next Ice Age?
And if not, then what are we wasting all this verbage and money for?
I suppose fingers need to be exercised and debt incurred, but for Wales?
This can only ,eran that Mann universityinvented the Hockey Stick nThe guy is a looney how dare he be allowed withinnthe confines of a
a university my bad
Regarding “Creationists”: I am a creationist, in that I believe there was a primary cause, a creation, but the context means specifically, “Young Earth Creationists.” There is a difference. I’ve been fighting young earth creationism my whole life, even when I considered myself a fundamentalist. (Howard J. Van Till has clearly presented views that match well to my own.)
As to specific examples, Dr. Henry Morris is documented in his willful and knowing falsehoods, repeated to deceive (or worse). Ken Ham can hardly be considered better.
I believe in God. I hold faith by faith. It is a blind leap that I see as reasonable and rational from several perspectives, including the historical fact that nearly all great minds did too. I follow Jesus. He said he is the truth. If there is any lie in a thing, I reject it as having no part in Jesus. Accordingly, I reject young earth creationism and the fantasies they peddle.
The important point in the analogy is that the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (carbon dioxide cult) proponents act like the young earth creationists. We realists, or skeptics, are called deniers, while they make fun of those who deny the earth is more than 6,000 years old. I don’t think any of it is funny. It is, however, tragic, in both instances.
Andres Valencia says:
July 13, 2013 at 6:45 pm
I have some trouble with Nicola Scafetta’s writings. While I do refer to a 60 year cycle myself, that period shows up in many other analyses.
Ryan,
Phil Jones said: “The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has…“. Note that Jones said nothing about the oceans, and the ARGO buoy array also shows ocean cooling.
That is hardly ‘out of context’. Jones admits the planet has cooled, and that was many years ago. The cooling has continued since then. Here are more supporting quotes.
Finally, I note your weak attempt to label me as a Creationist. I am not. But just for fun: you cannot prove that you, the world, and everything else did not come into existence ten seconds ago. In fact, you cannot prove that this is not a memory from a reality that has yet to exist; it could be a fabricated memory waiting to be remembered at a future time, but which never really existed at all. Which may be why Creationists tend to win most of their debates…☺
Four months ago, in March, Steve McIntyre pointed out the same thing in Mann’s AGU presentation:
In addition, ferd berple & others pointed out in comments in this WUWT thread, which was devoted to discussing the McIntyre thread, that in one of his March presentations Mann deceptively used only the land surface temperature graphic:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/03/michael-manns-new-trick-pulled-off-at-the-american-geophysical-union-convention-exposed-by-mcintyre/
Incidentally, it seems to me that even if the MWP were only local to the Northern Hemisphere, and even only to its high latitudes, its existence there for centuries would be sufficient to undermine alarmist claims about a runaway warming effect from decreased ice-albedo and increased methane emissions from warming permafrost. I urge others to harp on this point.
Even Rudd doesn’t believe in Mann anymore LOL
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/national/kevin-rudd-to-announce-scrapping-of-carbon-tax/story-fnii5s41-1226678990206
I think he believes pauses can be smoothed out.
I know, but why are we taking the defensive ??
There must be a hint of a fact, somewhere ?
Caption contest:
1. Mann claims global warming causes baldness….brings ‘proof’.
Dang dude! Shoulda let me know! Would loved to have hung out. Next time ok?
I am a creationist. I believe the universe was created by the Big Bang which later transformed itself into a popular TV series which has a massive number of adherents who are regular observers, though some just want to look at Penny’s eyes.
How long before Mann moves to the solar hypothesis and that is the reason. Just wait a few hundred years folks! Warming will come! I predicted this (he kinda did).
knock knock knock- Penny? knock knock knock- Penny? knock knock knock- Penny?
Maybe he’s looking at the recent temperature record upside-down. Bizarre.