Open Thread Weekend – Mann Overboard! Edition


I’m traveling today, so an open thread seems useful. Some topics might be:

1. Schollenberger’s coup with SkS ratings data

2. Will Steve Goddard issue a correction, or just ignore it?

3. Why is Dr. Mann playing with fire on Twitter? Is he just being an emotional child or does he want another lawsuit? We’ve been down this path before. See: Monday Mirthiness – Watch the genesis (and retraction) of a smear.

Yet, he persists, as if he can’t help himself:

Mann’s bogus claim asked and answered here:

If I’m paid (I’m not) to spout “disinformation” as Mann claims, why do I publish posts like this one and this one correcting other skeptics and true disinformation.

Of course, his hateful claim might just be misdirected rage at having been sliced and diced by McIntyre again.





newest oldest most voted
Notify of
David Ball

“Nothing is so burdensome as a secret.” – French proverb


Jake J

Ckiff Mass, an atmospheric sciences professor at the University of Washington, has taken the Pacific Northwest section of the National Climate Assessment and filleted it like a fish. Mass is a “middle ground” type on warming who thinks it’s happening, but who also thinks it’s exaggerated by the alarmists.


Dr Mann and the climate mainstream [obligatory anti-lawsuit disclaimer follows: *seem to me to have*] a “funding model” that assumes forcing under politically motivated sponsorship, such as George Soros or the MacArthur Foundation, and, and feedbacks in echo chambers such as BBC or NBC/CBS/ABC broadcast news. Variations in public opinion trends, therefore are due to OTHER well-funded forcings and media feedbacks, attributed to Koch and Exxon as counter-forcing, and Fox News and Rush Limbaugh as counter-feedback.
Or, perhaps the forcings and feedbacks don’t matter under this mental model, because they know (anti-lawsuit disclaimer: in my opinion) that “everybody lies about climate: us, them, EVERYbody!”
Natural variation is denied.

David, UK

Anthony, I know it’s not your style; but if you would sue I, and doubtless thousands of others, would donate! Deal? (!)


Remember, Dr Mann’s is also speaking as a representative of Penn State (according to their own regulations), so anyone suing should also sue Penn State.

You should be careful when claiming absolute authority over what is disinformation and what is not. Those 10 points by Roy Spencer have themselves been rebuffed (and who still seemingly can’t grasp that a cooler body CANNOT make a hotter body hotter still).

“Anthony, I know it’s not your style; but if you would sue I, and doubtless thousands of others, would donate! Deal? ”
I second that motion.

Pamela Gray

Scientists like him killed my appetite for a continued career in research. How many other gifted new-comers to scientific research have left too early or never started because of these out of control madmen???

As I recall Mann is at some university in PA. As a start, how about a letter to the department
in which he teaches(?). Hard to imagine someone who recently claimed that global warming hasn’t stopped, it’s just slowed down, as being employed by a university as a faculty member. As a janitor, yes, but not as faculty. I wonder if he realizes just how sappy he appears in his photographs?

I hope Steve does follow up. He was not wrong but more information and a slightly more analytical method provides better evidence going to his basic point: the adjusted temperature record is deeply flawed and the flaws reflect an agenda. Nothing that you, Zeke and Nick have done changes that; rather you have bullet proofed Steve’s argument.
Too bad Mann didn’t have guys like you around to check his work on the Hockey Stick.


Pamela, there isn’t a field that doesn’t have jerks and liars in it.
It’s just sad that other people tend to be driven away, which lets the jerks and liars keep up their mischief, because few want to deal with them.
Law? Journalism? Auto mechanics? You name it. What degree you have or what your uniform is (three-piece, coveralls or lab coat) does not exempt your field.
Science in particular has maintained a reputation that reduced outside scrutiny (by claiming both harsh internal scrutiny and inscrutability), which allowed the weeds to flourish.

Chuck L

“Anthony, I know it’s not your style; but if you would sue I, and doubtless thousands of others, would donate! Deal? ”
I’d be in.


News flash: Mann says Koch money is good!

Shawn in High River

“Anthony, I know it’s not your style; but if you would sue I, and doubtless thousands of others, would donate! Deal? ”
I second that motion.
-I want in too

Lady in Red

I vote for a legal response to Mann and his protector/enabler Penn State. Someone has to reign him in, be responsible.
The problem with tweets like Mann’s is that they become molecules of disinformation in the universe of the naive who continue to believe, and repeat. Someone, at a dinner party will say something and another will say, “Oh, but Anthony Watts is paid to do that. The Koch boys fund him…”
And another will say, “I never heard that…. I though he did it for the love, for the sport…. for the science.”
“Nope,” says person Number One. “Michael Mann knows and tweeted it. The Koch brothers fund everything Watts does….”
And, there you have it.
Stop Mann, Anthony. And, get rich at the same time. ….Lady in Red

El Nino on it’s way! Higher temperatures, more storms, more sea level rise……………….!

Jake J

I would donate if you need money.

Chuck L

Merovign says:
May 10, 2014 at 1:47 pm
“Pamela, there isn’t a field that doesn’t have jerks and liars in it”
What makes the Mann’s of the world so toxic, odious, and deleterious is that climate science has been politicized and the far-reaching actions being taken by EPA, Energy Dept., NASA, etc., and Obama himself to “prevent” climate change/global warming are based on the poor and/or manipulated science of Mann and the rest of the Klimate Nomenklatura with Congress being ignored or bypassed. Unfortunately at this time the “jerks and liars” are controlling the narrative.

ilma630 says:
May 10, 2014 at 1:18 pm
(and who still seemingly can’t grasp that a cooler body CANNOT make a hotter body hotter still
Soo… That insulation in my attic that is cooler than my house doesn’t result in my house being hotter? As insulation is to conductive heat transfer, CO2 is to radiant heat transfer. The mechanism is hugely more complicated, but it does result in a hotter hot side, just like insulation does.

Sixty American scientists have written to Ed Davey pointing out the disastrous fallacies in his policy for biomass.
Will he listen? Do pigs fly?

Travis Casey

I’ve just spent the afternoon reading Dana’s blog posts at The Guardian and I feel like I need a shower with disinfectant.

Gunga Din

Why is it so hard for this guy to realize that some people aren’t motivated by money or fame?


Jay Curry points out: “Nothing that you, Zeke and Nick have done changes that; rather you have bullet proofed Steve’s argument.”
As the person who first suggested the late station reporting behind Goddard’s “adjustments” hockey stick that is now broken since it wasn’t an up-adjustment at all, merely his use of absolute temperatures instead of anomalies that are vertically re-centered along a zero line that meant that the fewer number of stations in the raw data resulted in a naturally upward spike since more absolute (in-filled) numbers were included in Steve’s final average, I agree with Curry that now that Goddard’s software itself *has* been independently verified, his overall exposure of real adjustments is stronger for it as skeptics demonstrate their admirable use of the scientific method, despite sporaric confusion, invested egos, and snickering activist hacks.
-=NikFromNYC=-, Ph.D. in chemistry (Columbia/Harvard)


Note to self: your iPhone spell checker doesn’t work here, or at best “sporarically.”


Just imagine how hot it would be if the satellite record had not come along to moderate the “adjustments”

Pamela Gray says:
May 10, 2014 at 1:29 pm
Scientists like him killed my appetite for a continued career in research. How many other gifted new-comers to scientific research have left too early or never started because of these out of control madmen???

When I was growing up I thought I wanted to be a scientist. Drift and failure at college drew me into aerospace engineering. I am SO GLAD. In engineering things HAVE to work. I like that.


All Mann does, is to set himself up for a great fall.
By opening his big mouth, pride gone, without prompt or persuasion he continues to dig himself in deeper
Mann, all that this guy is, a paid shill of USgov.Penn-state/climatealchemy/organ, as the vacant din of Mann made graffiti fades away into the background noise. At some point, [and with a lot of luck] eventually – an authentically small ‘c’ conservative Republican US President may posit the question, “what the hell are we doing encouraging and funding this guy?”


(I hope i’ve got all my indentations correct.)
For background (which may have legal implications), over two years ago I posted:

Watts isn’t paid for his blogging. A Heartland document describes a request he made last year for funding for a different project:

James D wrote on WUWT: “Anthony Watts proposes to create a new Web site devoted to accessing the new temperature data from NOAA’s web site and converting them into easy-to-understand graphs that can be easily found and understood by weathermen and the general interested public. Watts has deep expertise in Web site design generally and is well-known and highly regarded by weathermen and meteorologists everywhere. The new site will be promoted heavily at Heartland has agreed to help Anthony raise $88,000 for the project in 2011. The Anonymous Donor has already pledged $44,000. We’ll seek to raise the balance.”

Watts later reported on the progress of this project:

“Using the funds provided with the help of Heartland’s private donor, I hired a specialist programmer familiar with NOAA systems to trap and convert the NOAA sat feed data to look like any other hourly station (like ASOS hourly stations at airports etc) so that we’d be able to start the visualization and comparison process. This is just one phase of the project before it is ready for public consumption. When finished, there will be a website free and open to the public that will allow tracking and visualization of temperatures from the CRN right alongside that of the regular surface network”


Eight months ago, this exchange occurred here:

Chad Wozniak says:
August 31, 2013 at 11:38 am
If Michael Mann is so eager to sue everybody – maybe he’d better consider whether it’s smart to libel Anthony with his comments about Koch,

REPLY: Yes, I’m actually considering some options there. I’ve never taken a dime from Koch, and Mann doesn’t know what he’s talking about. For somebody who is in the libel lawsuit business, he’s certainly a loose cannon. – Anthony

Mann tweeted, “Being stalked by #HeartlandInstitute/#Koch-funded climate change denier #AnthonyWatts & his mob:”
Roger Knights: That phrasing falsely implies ongoing funding, and it also falsely implies that such funding as there was, was funding for your blogging (“denying”), not just for a side-project that is merely an attempt to provide a user-friendly interface to a government dataset. So those are two chinks in his armor.

One month ago this exchange occurred:

Sister Michelle says:
April 2, 2014 at 8:58 am
I was disappointed to discover today that the host of this page is a paid, ($44k Heartland Institute) . . .

This claim was refuted in another thread yesterday. See these comments:

Today, Mann tweeted (on May 10, 2014 at 11:59 AM):
“#AnthonyWatts getting paid good money for his disinformation by Koch-funded HeartlandInstitute [link to Sourrcewatch:]”
whose 1st paragraph states:
“Willard Anthony Watts (Anthony Watts) is a blogger, weathercaster and non-scientist, paid AGW denier who runs the website . . . . Watts is on the payroll of the Heartland Institute, which itself is funded by polluting industries.[1]”
The “[1]” footnote links to this site:
which cites material hacked by Gleick from Heartland. Its early paragraphs state:
“The documents show [Australian] Professor [Bob] Carter receives a “monthly payment” of $US1667 ($1550) as part of a program to pay “high-profile individuals who regularly and publicly counter the alarmist [anthropogenic global warming] message.
“Professor Carter did not deny he was being paid by The Heartland Institute, but would not confirm the amount, or if the think tank expected anything in return for its money.”
Two paragraphs of quotes from Carter follow, then:
“Altogether, more than $US20 million had been spent funding and co-ordinating the activities of climate sceptics and bloggers since 2007, the documents suggest. Other cash recipients include Anthony Watts, the leading US climate sceptic blogger, who is to receive $US90,000 for his work this year.”
That last sentence plainly implies that Watts was “[an]other cash recipient” like Carter, who was therefore also being paid on an ongoing basis to “regularly and publicly counter the alarmist [anthropogenic global warming] message.” I.e., that he was being paid for his blogging.
This was wrong in two ways. The Heartland document stated (IIRC) that he was getting a one-time fee, not for expressing opinions countering the alarmist message, but to provide a user-friendly front-end for a government-run website containing data about its high-quality weather station network.)
So (if I am right about what the Heartland documents said about Watt’s project), the quotes from the WATODAY website were knowingly false and malicious.
The Sourcewatch site tried to distance itself from making this libelous claim by citing WATODAY as its source. But it included no qualifying phrase like “According to WATODAY.” It simply made a bald assertion. And it went beyond WATODAY, which didn’t explicitly claim that Watts was being continually paid for blogging.
But Sourcewatch should know better by now, and so should Mann (who similarly hides behind his citation of Sourcewatch), since Watts’s rebuttals have been posted on his site, as I cited above (there are probably more, which a little Googling would turn up), which site alarmists like them monitor. So I suspect that they are on thin ice, legally.
OTOH, I suspect that they could defend themselves by saying that Watts hadn’t contacted them directly with a lawyer’s letter presenting evidence to the contrary. That should probably be Anthony’s next step: or at least see a lawyer.
If there are any legal beagles reading this, please weigh in with your opinions.


I have a question
When is Joe Bastardi going to discuss this:

I’ve added a few more pages to my hobby site, specifically regarding analysis of Crysophere Today anomalies. You can now see, for instance, that the average Antarctic anomaly for January through April this year was the highest on record:
As always, I’m open to feedback, suggestions, corrections, etc.

Charles Nelson

Mann is wrong about most things…why can’t we just let him be wrong about this too?


Let him blow himself up. People spitting venom do not endear themselves or their views to anyone else.
The fact that he has to indulge instead of ignoring you means your views are reasonable and resonating loudly in his space
On the article re hitting the sea ice extent Average by August why not put up a countdown clock on it?
I know it might not come true [especially when you try due to Murphy’s Law] but you will attract more attention by putting it out there as an example of what things need to happen to disprove global warming as a major concern.
sorry if it backfires but the interst it might generate could be worth it?


Whether you are being paid a zillion by Coke or a billion by alqaeda or F’all by anyone that fact remains the same – your points stand or fail on their own merit. If there is a falsehood Mann needs to identify it or Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform.


an obviously insecure Bob Ward nonetheless feels ***”secure” in his job:
11 May: UK Independent: Ian Johnston: Nigel Lawson’s climate-change denial charity ‘intimidated’ environmental expert
Academic claims that the former chancellor’s foundation complained to his employer.
A think-tank that has become the UK’s most prominent source of climate-change denial is embroiled in a row about its charitable status. There are also claims that one of its trustees tried to exact “retribution” on the person who complained about it to the charities watchdog…
In his submission to the commissioners, Bob Ward, policy director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, said the “continual activity has damaged the public interest” and was a breach of the rules governing charities…
Mr Ward, well known for his attempts to hold climate-change deniers to account, said he had submitted the complaint in a private capacity. But he revealed that a trustee of GWPF had written to his employer, the London School of Economics, earlier this year accusing him of making “unacceptable”, “ill-informed” and “ranting” comments in the media about global warming and energy policies despite not being an academic.
In one letter, the trustee said the LSE should be aware that a “distinguished Oxford scientist” had told him: “It’s appalling that the LSE employs people like Bob Ward.” The trustee, whose identity Mr Ward requested be kept anonymous, did not mention his own link to the GWPF…
“This is the way in which the foundation goes about its business, trying to intimidate its opponents into silence,” he told The Independent on Sunday. “For someone in a less ***secure position than [me], this could be extremely damaging.”…
The Charity Commission said that Mr Ward’s complaint was still an active case.
“The commission has been engaging with the trustees of the charity [GWPF] since we received a complaint relating to some of its statements and published material,” it said.
“We advised the trustees that we did not consider that all the contents of the website advanced education, as required of a charity. In addition, we had raised a question with the trustees about whether all the content of the website was in line with our guidance on campaigning and political activity by charities.”…
comment by Leslie Graham:
At what point does deliberately spreading lies about climate change to protect the short term profits of the carbon corporations become a criminal offence?
Freedom of speech does not extend to shouting “There is NO FIRE!” in a theatre that is rapidly filling with smoke.
I hope I live long enough to see such repellant individuals stand trial.


a trifle dogmatic!
10 May: The Weather Network: U.S. Climate report: Time is now for Canada to take action on climate change
by Scott Sutherland, Digital Meteorologist
A new climate assessment report released this week gives a detailed and honest look at the present and future climate change for the United States. However, Canadians should sit up and take notice of this report and its contents, as they will apply equally to us as well…
Most importantly of all, we are going to have to adapt the way we think – to accept the reality of what we’ve done to the planet, to leave behind the notions of what we typically expect from the weather, the seasons and the climate, so that we can better deal with the changes that are to come, and to embrace the idea that we can change things for the better if we act now.


10 May: NYT: Coral Davenport: Brothers Battle Climate Change on Two Fronts
Today the work of Robert and William Nordhaus is profoundly shaping how the United States and other nations take on global warming…
Bill Nordhaus, 72, a Yale economist who is seen as a leading contender for a Nobel Prize, came up with the idea of a carbon tax and effectively invented the economics of climate change. Bob, 77, a prominent Washington energy lawyer, wrote an obscure provision in the Clean Air Act of 1970 that is now the legal basis for a landmark climate change regulation, to be unveiled by the White House next month, that could close hundreds of coal-fired power plants and define President Obama’s environmental legacy.
Called the Manning brothers of climate change, the mild-mannered, dry-witted Nordhauses are scions of a New Mexico family long rooted in the land, which powerfully shaped who the brothers became…
“I tend to have lots of crazy ideas, and I run them by Bob first,” Bill said by phone from the Acela train between Boston and New Haven, Conn. He described himself as “an academic economist” who has stayed out of policy debates, although his ideas have not.
Bob agreed. “Bill’s work is about what needs to be done and how soon, using the tools of economic analysis,” he said over a recent lunch in Washington. “My work is: How do you convert that into a legal and regulatory policy?”
The two have a friendly rivalry, but both believe that cutting carbon pollution is crucial to protecting the environment and the economy from the risks posed by climate change. They also agree on the best way to do it: A Bill-style carbon tax, they say, would be far more effective and efficient than a Bob-style regulation…
In the ensuing decades at Yale, Bill developed an economic model that put a price tag on the effects of climate change, like more droughts, flooding and crop failures and stronger hurricanes. He called it the Dynamic Integrated Climate-Economy model, or DICE…


a “Climate Parent” in Wyoming fights back!
10 May: Star-Tribune Wyoming: Cate Cabot: Lots of Wyoming parents want climate change taught
Do Wyoming citizens not want their students to learn contemporary peer reviewed science that has been found excellent by Wyoming scientists and teachers? The small opposition minority making this claim is working hand in glove with the national right-wing organization Truth in American Education, who have been supporting state efforts against the Common Core and NGSS across the country – truly the pot calling the kettle black. TAE does not want science taught to students at all!
So let me ask you, do you want your children and grandchildren to have access to what highly respected Wyoming teacher Elizabeth Horsch, a veteran of over 30 years in standards development, described as “the best science standards she has ever seen?” …
Are the people who claim that the NGSS is not wanted in Wyoming really speaking for you? They are absolutely not speaking for me. I live in Wyoming. I am a Wyoming resident, born and raised. I am a member of the coalition Wyoming for Science Education. And I am a parent engaged with fellow Climate Parents across Wyoming…
Write letters. Pick up the phone. It will take consistent effort from many of us to demand that Gov. Mead and the Wyoming Legislature accept the original conclusion of the highly merited committee appointed by the state Board of Education. Otherwise you will watch the best interests of Wyoming students get washed away in the hysteria of a small anti-science minority driven by a national right wing group – and political manipulation.

The coming mini Ice Age. Piers Corbyn.

Leonard Jones

I am going strictly by the title of the piece: Mann Overboard. My first thought
was that when the end does come, Mann will be tossed under the bus. Once
he becomes an embarrassment, the end will get really ugly!

Bad News Quillan

Don’t sue. That’s Mann’s game.
— Bad News

pat says:
May 10, 2014 at 6:45 pm

Well teaching non-sense as science is hardly an advance. See the video here by Piers Corbyn. It is not CO2 it is solar magnetic fields. He predicts a mini-Ice Age for the next 20 to 25 years. Maybe the “scientists” are wrong. Maybe those evil Republicans are right. Then what?

Jimmy Haigh.

One question I have is about TOBS. (Time of Observation). Why not just take the max and min temperatures regardless of what time they occur?

James Martin, PhD

More of the left’s tactics when they are losing ground and do not have a leg to stand on… as in their efforts to tie-in Republicans with being racist, they tie you in to what they try to demonize – the “filthy greedy upper 1%” – aka the Koch brothers. Unfortunately, the less educated masses (and the better educated masses whose brains have been washed with excessive amounts of party-line Clorox) are going to fall for it, hook, line, and sinker. Basic psychology, though becoming increasingly pompous, asinine, and belittling in the approach.


ROTFLMAO … there’s a seriously fkdp ‘journalist’ at The Guardian, Nafeez Ahmed, who blames the abduction of the Nigerian schoolgirls on climate change. What’s more, he even tries to defend his claptrap from the ire of commenters.

“Jimmy Haigh. says:
May 10, 2014 at 7:38 pm
One question I have is about TOBS. (Time of Observation). Why not just take the max and min temperatures regardless of what time they occur?”
Here is an experiment that EVERY SKEPTIC can do.
why? because it was already done and posted YEARS AGO on John Daly’s site
The experiement is simple. You take stations that record data hour by hour or minute by minute
You then Set your time of observation to be 7 am.
record the max and min.
Then Using the EXACT SAME DATASTREAM you change the time of observation to
1am, 2,am ect.
And you will see with your very own eyes how changing the TOB changes the min max
Historically in the US ( one of the FEW countries to change its TOB) the change results in cooling the past
Lets wind the clock back to 2007. 2007.
climate audit
here is the comment
Now, in 2007 I was highly skeptical of adjustments until I found JerryBs work
“When using a pair of min/max thermometers for daily temperature observations, the time of day at which the readings for the previous 24 hours are observed, and the thermometers are reset, will often cause a time of observation bias (TOB). If readings are taken near the times of daily highs, or daily lows, those highs, and lows, often affect the readings of two days. Annual averages of the effects of TOB on recorded temperatures can be more than 1° F (0.56° C) at many locations, and near 2° F (1.11° C) at some. (This review of TOB is limited to temperature observations using min/max thermometer pairs, and/or electronic min/max thermometer sets which yield comparable results. Temperature observations using other kinds of thermometers may also have some kinds of TOB, but they are outside the scope of this review.)
In the “United States Historical Climatology Network” (USHCN), one kind of temperature adjustment is a TOB adjustment relative to midnight for observations made at times other than midnight. The occurence of TOB, and adjustments for it, are particularly important factors if the time of observation at a weather observation station changes.
In order to gain a better perspective of this bias, hourly temperature data of 190 US locations were used to calculate estimates of TOB relative to midnight, as well as estimates of some other items that seemed interesting.
The approach used is to choose several hypothetical “times of observation”, and to calculate what high, and low, temperatures a 24 hour min/max thermometer set would have “observed” at those times based on the hourly temperature records. These estimates cannot be precisely accurate partly because hourly observations will miss highs, or lows, that occur between the times of those observations, but hourly observations can provide at least an approximation of TOB. ”
here is my challenge. Ive made it many times on WUWT.
Go through the data. Do the work. I did back in in 2007.
to date I dont know of another person who has been willing to actually look at data on this.
when you do you will see that the TOBS adjustment is absolutely REQUIRED.
and ya, the US is one of the few countries that had to do this ( norway, canada, australia, and japan have a few isolated examples )


Id laugh my ass off if the Koch bros decided to sue Mann for libel.


“Streetcred says:
May 10, 2014 at 7:58 pm
ROTFLMAO … there’s a seriously fkdp ‘journalist’ at The Guardian, Nafeez Ahmed, who blames the abduction of the Nigerian schoolgirls on climate change. What’s more, he even tries to defend his claptrap from the ire of commenters.
The USA (current admin )wants the UN Security Council to change its charter from peacekeeping ,to “green helmeted” world police invasion force .In order to to quell any type of unrest attributed to climate change.Susan Rice proposed it again in 2013.

I genuinely think there is something wrong with Mann – he seems to me to be one of those people who can’t even admit the possibility they are wrong. If I am right, by his twisted logic, anyone who disagrees with him must be insane or corrupt – because they can’t be right.