Above: Actual photo from Dr. Mann’s Facebook page courtesy Mark Steyn writing in: “The Mann I love”
LOL, gotta love the caveat “almost” anything. Redditers are welcome to ask Dr. Mann questions in this online forum today:
Science AMA Series: I’m Michael E. Mann, Distinguished Professor of Meteorology at Penn State, Ask Me Almost Anything! (self.science)
submitted 1 hour ago by MichaelEMann Distinguished Professor of Meteorology Penn State
I’m Michael E. Mann. I’m Distinguished Professor of Meteorology at Penn State University, with joint appointments in the Department of Geosciences and the Earth and Environmental Systems Institute (EESI). I am also director of the Penn State Earth System Science Center (ESSC). I received my undergraduate degrees in Physics and Applied Math from the University of California at Berkeley, an M.S. degree in Physics from Yale University, and a Ph.D. in Geology & Geophysics from Yale University. My research involves the use of theoretical models and observational data to better understand Earth’s climate system. I am author of more than 160 peer-reviewed and edited publications, and I have written two books including Dire Predictions: Understanding Global Warming, co-authored with my colleague Lee Kump, and more recently, “The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines”, recently released in paperback with a foreword by Bill Nye “The Science Guy” (www.thehockeystick.net).
“The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars” describes my experiences in the center of the climate change debate, as a result of a graph, known as the “Hockey Stick” that my co-authors and I published a decade and a half ago. The Hockey Stick was a simple, easy-to-understand graph my colleagues and I constructed that depicts changes in Earth’s temperature back to 1000 AD. It was featured in the high-profile “Summary for Policy Makers” of the 2001 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and it quickly became an icon in the climate change debate. It also become a central object of attack by those looking to discredit the case for concern over human-caused climate change. In many cases, the attacks have been directed at me personally, in the form of threats and intimidation efforts carried out by individuals, front groups, and politicians tied to fossil fuel interests. I use my personal story as a vehicle for exploring broader issues regarding the role of skepticism in science, the uneasy relationship between science and politics, and the dangers that arise when special economic interests and those who do their bidding attempt to skew the discourse over policy-relevant areas of science.
I look forward to answering your question about climate science, climate change, and the politics surrounding it today at 2 PM EST. Ask me almost anything!
==========================================================
Go here to ask “almost anything”: http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1yj3o7/science_ama_series_im_michael_e_mann/
h/t to WUWT reader “devijvers”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
RaiderDingo says:
February 21, 2014 at 8:03 am
Does this article refute Steve McIntyre?
Not when you read it. In fact, the author is criticising Wegman et al, who did blundered pretty seriously in the pot-kettle department, probably due to what I used to think of as professorial blindness back in the old salad days:
Professor to Grad student: I need this research on my desk yesterday
GS: but I have a date!
PtoGS: Irrelevant.
GS slopes off and half-***edly assembles “data” for professor.
Professor assumes “data” is simply the brilliant product he has “trained” his GS to produce.
Professor is then embarrassed and GS smiles.
The author argues ineffectively that because M&M showed graphs of the most pronounced 1% of their results (“Oooh, cherry picking”, but!!! they are avowedly making cherry pie). M&M give the descriptive statistics of the resultant distributions of their simulations on page 1 of their paper, and the author dodges that little fact. M&M used the graphs they did in order to illustrate that, using simulated data, a Mannian hockey stick indistinguishable from their worst-case results occurs around one per cent of the time. The take away was that Mann could not attribute his stick to causal conditions if he could not exclude mathematical artifacts, and apparently, he was unconversant with the existence of the problem or the standard steps to mitigate it. Worse, he can’t even say with certainty that he really understands that character of his data!
I believe that Jeff Id and others demonstrated similar problems with other AGW papers that relied on Mann and team’s methods. That doesn’t go away. It is also important to remember that Mann really did “fabricate” his hockey stick and did not either identify that he did so or justify why he did so. He added in temperature to the end of the series where his ring data ceased to behave as he wanted it to. Those actions (or the non-actions really) are the crux of the matter. Openness in science is essential, as is the ability to listen to, and more importantly, to use criticism to improve your work. Mann is not open about his work and he can’t use criticism constructively to improve his work. In fact he throws lawsuits – the adult version of temper tantrums instead when criticism occurs. Deep Climate’s arguments simply gloss over the issue by employing strawman style argumentation
Why no mention of his Nobel Peace Prize? He was awarded one after all for his broken ‘hokey’ schtick.
I am really dissappointed to learn that the happy news that Mann had lost his suit against Dr Ball was… er… not reliable. I am still very hopefull that the suit will come to a fair conclusion acquitting Dr Ball, and he can put this behind him.
Mann dropped his suit over a year ago, as was reported on WUWT somewhere. The news reported today was that Ball has just filed a countersuit for $10 million.
” Mike Tremblay says:
February 21, 2014 at 10:10 am
Last night I was reading about Trenberth’s claim to be a Nobel Laureate, due to being involved in the IPCC’s work, and recalled that Mann made the same claim. I suddenly realized that, using their claim metrics, that I am also a Nobel Laureate. In 1988, the Nobel Awards committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to all Peacekeepers. I have served on a UN peacekeeping mission therefore, thanks to Kevin and Mike, I am eligible to make my claim to Nobel Laureate status. ;)”
I am a citizen of Britain, and thus a citizen of the EU. The EU won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012, so I am a Nobel laureate.
I too am finding the status of Dr Balls legal engagement with the mann confusing, perhaps Dr Ball could provide an update.
Ditto for the action brought by that weaselly activist Weaver, who is now an elected public leech in BC.
Oops–I wrote just above:
Actually, it’s Steyn who’s suing. See the thread after this one.
“Big Don says:
February 21, 2014 at 9:19 am
From Wikipedia:
Megalomania is a psychopathological disorder characterized by delusional fantasies of power, relevance, or omnipotence. “Megalomania is characterized by an inflated sense of self-esteem and overestimation by persons of their powers and beliefs.”[1]
Does this remind you of anyone in particular?”
It certainly explains Mann’s behavior over the years, doesn’t it? If Mikey is living in his own delusional meglomaniacal fantasy world, the real tragedy of it is that those that his followers and believers are totally unaware of it even as he displays the symptoms of it right in front of their faces, including many in government and the media.
rogerknights says:
February 21, 2014 at 11:28 am
Alan Robertson says:
February 21, 2014 at 10:36 am
I just realized that the news of Dr. Ball’s triumph in the BC courts was reported by John O’Sullivan of P.S.I.
I withhold further comment in re this matter until substantive reporting from reliable sources is evident.
Mann dropped his suit over a year ago, as was reported on WUWT somewhere. The news reported today was that Ball has just filed a countersuit for $10 million.
______________________________
I haven’t found any news reports of this event, have you?
motherF*er, that climate freak didn’t answer my very reasonable question!
If Mr. O’Sullivan was lying then I am sorry I mentioned it.
How many “distinguished” professors actually use this adjective in self descriptions?
Dear Dr. Mann, In your claim against Steyn, et. al., you claim to have been exonerated by several institutions including a review by Penn State? How could any reasonable person not question that claim? Also, why doesn’t your defense fund just drop your suit now before you totally embarrass them?
” Canman
How many “distinguished” professors actually use this adjective in self descriptions?”
Distinguished Professor is an actual academic rank and not self-glorification
I looked at the picture. Then I saw the little heart shaped symbol in the sentence, ” show the Mann a
(heart) on Valentine’s day. The first picture that came to my mind was an Inca high priest (Al Gore) showing “the” Mann’s heart in front of his face.
gb_dorset says:
Dave L says:
Paul says:
David L. Hagen says:
gbdorset says:
Gary Meyers says:
Fred says:
mpaul says:
There is a lot of redundancy amongst these names… Slayers indeed, more like someone is trying to poison this thread.
Thanks for being alert Anthony! (and dealing with the tedious!)
Concerning Trenberth – I think y’all have misunderstood his claim. Rather than Nobel Laureate, I think he was claiming to be a Noble Lariat. That is to say a model of ford pickup truck sold second hand through the Noble Motors Inc. of Tucson AZ.
Gary Meyers says:
February 21, 2014 at 10:52 am
OK. What is “Slayers”? I was all happy and such!
=============================================================================
They are a group that claims to have completely disproved the atmospheric green house effect.
The term “Slayers” comes from the title of a book written by several members of the group titled “Slaying the Sky Dragon – Death of the Greenhouse Gas Theory”
Anthony – could you explain what “garbage from the slayers” means please?
I can’t find anything online to explain the phrase.
There is a sort of parallel story, I should say oblique is a better descriptor, going on in Biblical Archaeology. An ex-curator of the Israeli Antiquities Authority (IAA) has made accusations of all sorts against Prof. James Tabor and Canadian filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici regarding the Talpiot Tomb, better known as the “Tomb of the Jesus Family”. Both Tabor and Jacobovici have tolerated these accusations because they believe in academic freedom, freedom to dissent, and so forth. But the accusations have gone on for a very long time (probably beginning before 2007), and are being made to Prof. Tabor’s home academic department at the University of North Carolina, and to sponsors of Tabor’s research. The accusations have been quite abusive at times and have become such a nuisance that Jacobovici has now sued this fellow for defamation in Israel (where justice grinds at a biblical pace). If one compares this situation with that of Michael Mann vs. Ball or Steyn, it is apparent that Mann is unbelievably thin-skinned. Tabor has put up with orders of magnitude worse, and has yet to take any civil action.
In Steyn’s response to Plaintiff’s claims, one jewel out of many is:
“Denies…claim…..except admits that there was an investigation by former FBI Director Freeh concluding that Penn State and its highest officers had helped cover up the serial child rape perpetrated by Dr Mann’s colleague Jerry Sandusky. ”
You gotta love this unrepentant fellow.
Okay, well an answer to my question was denied by Michael E Mann (Distinguished Professor of Meteorology Penn State)
http://oi62.tinypic.com/2i0dlxz.jpg
That was my question (and you can see he answered the two surrounding questions without issue, so I know he read mine, dammit!)
…but why didn’t he answer my question? =-(
From a question at http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1yj3o7/science_ama_series_im_michael_e_mann/
“… My undergraduate advisor was an IPCC contributing author and we’ve briefly discussed some of his email practices in light of what has happened to you and other scientists…”
Isn’t that interesting?
I put this in the wrong thread.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/02/21/steyn-countersues-mann-for-10-millon-dollars/#comment-1573510
O’Sullivan fooled me once with a strikingly similar post a while ago.
I think Mann my feel a worming feeling in the seat of his pants if he goes to court against Mark Stein. It could stain his reputation. Well, it is already stained so I stand corrected on that one.