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:
Michael Mann-child accuses @WattsUpWithThat of being paid to lie by @HeartlandInst. Example? Or just libel? pic.twitter.com/KkMfDS3rqc
— Steve Milloy (@JunkScience) May 10, 2014
Mann’s bogus claim asked and answered here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/about-wuwt/faqs/
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.
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
RepublicanUS 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:
Eight months ago, this exchange occurred here:
One month ago this exchange occurred:
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:]”
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Anthony_Watts
whose 1st paragraph states:
“Willard Anthony Watts (Anthony Watts) is a blogger, weathercaster and non-scientist, paid AGW denier who runs the website wattsupwiththat.com. . . . . Watts is on the payroll of the Heartland Institute, which itself is funded by polluting industries.[1]”
The “[1]” footnote links to this site:
http://www.watoday.com.au/environment/climate-change/scientist-denies-he-is-mouthpiece-of-us-climatesceptic-think-tank-20120215-1t6yi.html
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: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/W-5/
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:
http://www.climatenerd.com/antarctic-sea-ice-stats-averages.php?data_calc=avg_an&mva=10&yrb=1950&yre=2014&mnb=1&mne=4
As always, I’m open to feedback, suggestions, corrections, etc.
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.”…
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/nigel-lawsons-climatechange-denial-charity-intimidated-environmental-expert-9350069.html
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.
http://www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/us-climate-report-time-is-now-for-canadians-to-take-action-on-climate-change/26932/
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…
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/11/us/brothers-work-different-angles-in-taking-on-climate-change.html?_r=0
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.
http://trib.com/opinion/columns/cabot-lots-of-wyoming-parents-want-climate-change-taught/article_29df988a-98af-5bcc-9e23-669845edc42a.html
The coming mini Ice Age. Piers Corbyn.
http://youtu.be/6R26PXRrgds
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!
The video I left above was suggested by:
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2014/05/10/tinkering-around-with-nonsense-doesnt-work/
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?
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2014/05/10/tinkering-around-with-nonsense-doesnt-work/
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?
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. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/may/09/behind-rise-nigeria-boko-haram-climate-disaster-peak-oil-depletion
“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
http://climateaudit.org/2007/09/24/tobs/
here is the comment
http://climateaudit.org/2007/09/24/tobs/#comment-107763
Now, in 2007 I was highly skeptical of adjustments until I found JerryBs work
http://www.john-daly.com/tob/TOBSUM.HTM
“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. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2014/may/09/behind-rise-nigeria-boko-haram-climate-disaster-peak-oil-depletion”
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.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/robbins-report/2011/jul/21/your-taxes-work-un-global-warming-force/
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.