Global warming has stopped. Get over it. A response to Michael Mann in the Richmond Times Dispatch
By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
The collapsed global warming scare certainly has some odd characters coming to its defense in this paper. Michael Mann (Aug. 25), whom the Attorney General of Virginia investigated under the Fraud Against Taxpayers Act 2000 after some statistical peculiarities in Mann’s failed attempt to abolish the medieval warm period, now bloops another blooper.
He tries to deny the embarrassing near-17-year pause in global warming because “NASA found the warming continues unabated, with the past decade the warmest on record”. As an expert reviewer for the Fifth Assessment Report of the UN’s climate panel, let me correct his latest gaffe.
The monthly near-surface temperature record from the RSS satellites (above) shows no warming trend for 16 years 8 months. But go back 20 years and some warming shows up. The temperature climbed from 1993-1996, then stopped.
So the latest decade is a bit warmer than those that went before, but there has still been no warming for almost 17 years. Even the climate-science chairman of the UN’s climate panel, the IPCC, admits that. Elementary, my dear Michael. Tut, tut! Statistics 101.
Mann says there is “evidence that humans are warming the planet”. There can’t be. For 200 months there has been no warming at all. Get over it. Get a life.
Mann says his discredited attempt to rewrite medieval temperatures “has not been disproved”. Well, here is what Professor Ross McKitrick, who exposed Mann’s statistical peculiarities in the learned journals, had to say about it:
“… The conclusions are unsupported by the data. At the political level the emerging debate is about whether the enormous international trust that has been placed in the IPCC was betrayed. The hockey stick story reveals that the IPCC allowed a deeply flawed study to dominate the Third Assessment Report, which suggests the possibility of bias in the Report-writing process. In view of the massive global influence of IPCC Reports, there is an urgent need to bias-proof future assessments …”.
And here is the report of three Congressional statisticians in 2006:
“… we judge that the sharing of research materials, data and results was haphazardly and grudgingly done. In this case we judge that there was too much reliance on peer review, which was not necessarily independent.
“Moreover, the work has been sufficiently politicized that this community can hardly reassess their public positions without losing credibility.
“Overall, our committee believes that Mann’s assessments that the decade of the 1990s was the hottest decade of the millennium and that 1998 was the hottest year of the millennium cannot be supported by his analysis.”
Mann goes on to say, “Dozens of independent groups of scientists have independently reproduced and confirmed our findings …”. His double use of “independent” was scarcely the mot juste. Here is what the three statisticians told Congress:
“In our further exploration of the social network of authorships in temperature reconstruction, we found that at least 43 authors have direct ties to Dr. Mann by virtue of co-authored papers with him.
“Our findings from this analysis suggest that authors in the area of paleoclimate studies are closely connected and thus ‘independent studies’ may not be as independent as they might appear on the surface.”
Mann then complains at my pointing out that his earlier offensive references to climate “ ‘deniers’ and ‘denialists’ would be illegal in Europe as being anti-Jewish, racialist hate-speech.” He says he is Jewish. Then he should know better than to use such unscientific and (in Europe) illegal terms, calculated to imply Holocaust denial on the part of his opponents.
Mann says the House of Lords says I am not a member when I say I am. Sigh! Mann knows no more of British constitutional practice than he does of elementary statistics. Hansard records that the House has recognized my title to succeed my late beloved father, but does not record the House as saying I am not a member. Facts wrong again, Mike, baby. Try doing science, not invective.
Finally, Mann says I “impersonated a delegate from Myanmar” at a UN conference. Do I look Burmese? Do I sound Burmese? Did the chairman of the conference say he thought I was Burmese? No. He said he knew I was not from Burma. Facts wrong yet again, Mickey.
Meanwhile, the world continues to fail to warm as predicted. Not only Attorneys General but also taxpayers will soon, and rightly, be demanding their money back from the grasping profiteers of doom who so monstrously over-egged this particular pudding.
###
Lord Monckton is an expert reviewer for the IPCC’s forthcoming Fifth Assessment Report. He has lectured worldwide in climate science and economics and has published several papers in the learned literature. Oh, and his passport says he is The Right Honourable Christopher Walter, Viscount Monckton of Brenchley.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Mann then complains at my pointing out that his earlier offensive references to climate “ ‘deniers’ and ‘denialists’ would be illegal in Europe as being anti-Jewish, racialist hate-speech.” He says he is Jewish. Then he should know better than to use such unscientific and (in Europe) illegal terms, calculated to imply Holocaust denial on the part of his opponents.
Very respectfully, I would disagree. Those sorts of names – boorish though they are – have nothing to do with racialism or anti-Semitism in themselves. However, the names do clearly intend to put Sceptics on a par with anti-Semites.
As for whether such language would be illegal in that great bastion of freedom [/sarc] Europe: who cares. As you know, laws don’t stop people hating other people, whether said hate is justified or not. But I guess you’re using language that the likes of Mann might relate to, so fair play.
Eli Rabett says:
“Chris asked to be recognized as same”
I missed that part. Where did the good Lord specifically ASK to be recognized as same? Or are you just pulling things out of your Rabett hole?
Michael Mann, the principle hysterian (keeper of climate hysteria history) of Climate Science, once again begs the question: Is there anything stupid he’s willing to leave unspoken?
Margaret Hardman says:
August 26, 2013 at 10:45 am
When you say “I don’t know what they say” but then further state “I know who is telling the truth on this one”, that’s an obvious appeal to authority, Margaret.
If you believe Michael Mann, I must ask for what reason? Because he’s your hero Warmista?
You should dig deeper for the truth, m’Lady. Mann’s behavior and research are not those of a scientist. Activist?–yes, but not scientist.
Margaret Hardman says:
“I believe that someone who tells a falsehood knowing it to be false is a liar.”
When it comes to legalities, you can always find a lawyer to represent either side of an issue. Are they “liars”?
Is Mikey still claiming to be a Nobel Prize winner?
Margaret Hardman says: @ur momisugly August 26, 2013 at 10:45 am
I trust both Monckton and Mann can read and I know who is telling the truth on this one. It is Michael Mann. I believe that someone who tells a falsehood knowing it to be false is a liar.
Margaret
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And now we know you can not read or comprehend what you have read. Read Kadaka’s comment AGAIN.
I will even make it REAL EASY:
Mann is attacking the man and not the science and he falls flat on his face.
The actual information about the Mereworth case:
You and Mann owe Lord Monckton an apology.
If you believe Michael Mann, I must ask for what reason?
Because the ocean is warming strongly. The 0-700 meter region has warmed 40% more in the last 15 years than in the 15 years before that.
That’s doesn’t happen unless the planet has an energy imbalance. And the only known culprit of such an imbalance is manmade GHGs.
Q.E.D.
This pointless debate as to whether Monkton is a member ot the House of Lords or not, is exactly what the wamers want.
We know that Monkton is a peer of the realm through inheritance and he cannot vote in the House of Lords.
Anything else is somewhat nugatory!
It is not as if he pretended to be a Nobel Laureate like some Climate “Scientists”.
well, now, Margaret Hardman, if you are fair-minded and if you would read the comment above at 10:42 by kadaka you will be forced to conclude that Monckton has a legitimate claim as a member of the House Of Lords. And then you will apologize for your “liar” comment. But perhaps you are a Michael Mann worshiper and you care not what the world thinks of you so long as you get your worshipful comments posted here.
kadaka (KD Knoebel) on Aug. 26, 2013 at 10:42 says:
‘Go away, annoying whining she-troll.’
I’d be a little careful. Maybe Margaret Hardman is a ‘he.’ Check out the last name.
I know my preceding comment does nothing to further the argument but I don’t think MH’s comments do too.
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again.
Any study that is not replicable is not science!
Anyone who does not follow the scientific method is not a scientist!
Any researcher who does not release data for replication is a fraud!
That sums up everything about Michael Mann.
“Here come da heap big warmy ….”
Sedron, the UAH record shows no trend since August 1994, a total of 18 years 9 months.
False. UAH LT shows 0.24 C of warming in that time. The OLS sigma is 0.04 C, while that with autocorrelation is 0.33 C — i.e. warming, but at less than the 2-sigma level.
The large uncertainty simply shows that there is a lot of auto-correlation in the system, i.e. that the time period is too short to make statistically signfiicant judgements about climate.
Of course, some people like to make such conclusions regardless — “skeptics” now rely on it. Just a few years ago they were claiming the temperature records aren’t accurate. Funny how those claims have now disappeared.
PS: The same claim applies to RSS warming in Monckton’s time interval. Why didn’t you jump on that one, Willis?
Any study that is not replicable is not science!
Then RSS data is not science, since UAH finds a much different trend.
GIven their divergence, it is not clear if either is correctly estimating LT temperatures.
From Gary Pearse on August 26, 2013 at 10:51 am:
Ain’t that the cost of a new electronic version? Make sure it’s new, you don’t want used ones with worn-out data and margin notes scribbled after the Ends Of Files. They also might come from someone who read them on the toilet so you have to run them several times through the virus checker, to be sure.
Dang, these here computerized books sure show how bad inflation has been. When I was young I would’ve said Mann sure wrote a lot of two-bit words. Nowadays they can be 32 bits per word, or more!
Oh Gary, on Check Out click to donate to save the environment, think it’s only a buck. Then you’re guaranteed the electrons used to print and transmit your copy only came from Clean Green Renewables like wind and solar, as certified by WWF, EPA, and WTF.
Sedron – re: ” RSS data is not science, since UAH finds a much different trend.”, are you conflating data with analyses of that data? Is one even supposed to be a replication of the other?
Whether Monckton is a Lord interests me not at all. Maybe some are suggesting that he is delusional for claiming that he is a Lord. That, too, interests me not at all. Claiming that one is a Lord is about as mild a delusion as I can imagine.
When George Washington asked James Calvert to join his cabinet, he asked if Calvert would like to be introduced as Lord Baltimore. Calvert replied “No, I renounce the title.” At that point in the history of civilization, all questions regarding the importance of titles were answered.
Sedron L says:
August 26, 2013 at 11:11 am
If you believe Michael Mann, I must ask for what reason?
Because the ocean is warming strongly. The 0-700 meter region has warmed 40% more in the last 15 years than in the 15 years before that….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
GRAPH Figure 1
And if the ‘global’ [sic] temperature stays perfectly level for another decade, or two, or three, maybe a century…
oh what is Dr. Michael Mann to do?
We all know what he will do, he’ll trumpet that the warming continues — unabated… look at the cold 70’s… it’s the hottest many decades (or a century, heaven forbid) on ‘record’…
what a frickn joke and he calls this real “science” ??? He is a scientist by name only.
Your first statement is meaningless, because 40% of ZERO is ZERO. Since Argo was only available since 2003, we don’t have even 15 years of meaningful ocean temperature measurements, much less the 15 previous years. From what is available, the trend is surprisingly constant over the last 30 years. The red line in figure 9 on the link below shows the global ocean heat content.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/26/nodc-provides-1st-quarter-2013-ocean-heat-content-update-alarmist-writes-science-fiction/
Your second statement is clueless. Among other possibilities, a change in cloud cover also causes an energy imbalance.
Reading conversations and legal summaries on arcane matters of English peerage rights is certainly more exciting than reading technical material on odor control at landfills using biofilters, but it hardly addresses Mister Mann’s ad hominem attacks on his detractors or Viscount Moncton’s response. Besides, I believe we’ve had a couple of discussions over the importance of British peerage, the last one was about 200 years ago.
Mann’s claim to scientific acclaim is a long discredited temperature reconstruction that went from being the poster boy for global warming/climate change/climate disruption/extreme weather to disappearing. He has not yet been transparent in providing data and methods, as was common when I was doing research, for review.
Mann has taken to attacking his enemies while his “enemies” seem to be playing dirty by using data.
Okay people. Science is always open to debate. When the opinions of others that say the science is settled are open to debate, debate them. When they say the debate is over, F@ur momisugly#k them. Attack with all verocity as they do. The gloves are off and let’s see some bloodshed.
Sedron L 17 years not long nothing, well its funny how one extreme weather event is more than enough to ‘prove’ AGW, now those 17 years have meant that weather is not climate line has been dropped in a desperate attempt to keep ‘the cause ‘ on track.
Sedron L says:
August 26, 2013 at 11:11 am
“If you believe Michael Mann, I must ask for what reason?”
Because the ocean is warming strongly. The 0-700 meter region has warmed 40% more in the last 15 years than in the 15 years before that.
That’s doesn’t happen unless the planet has an energy imbalance. And the only known culprit of such an imbalance is manmade GHGs.
Q.E.D.
Hold on there, Skippy. The Argo floats (beg. in ’03) have measured a .02°C rise, but the margin of error on those is .1°C, or 5X the alleged increase. It could almost as easily be a decrease, we just don’t know. As for pre-Argo measurements, don’t make us laugh.
Your “energy imbalance” is as much a fantasy as the “missing heat” hiding in the deep oceans, and Dr. Spots’ traveling “Hotspots” Show.