Eric Worrall writes: 
The Cabot Institute, University of Bristol has published a full video of Michael Mann’s presentation in Bristol, which Anthony Attended.
I haven’t had a chance to watch the entire presentation yet, but the opening scene shows picture of cooling towers emitting steam – CO2 is transparent to visible light, so it’s a little more difficult to photograph.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
At 10:00 Mann’s observations conveniently stops at 2005…
Dr. Mann is the poster boy for modern science. From big pharma backed medical studies to climate models we see con-men spewing propaganda and outlandish stories. It is a testimony to the ignorance of the modern age that anyone such as “Dr.” Mann could become rich and famous spewing the falsehoods that he is famous for.
And he did “hide the decline” even if the parody video was taken down.
Best not watch it , as you known what happens to those that look at the actual face of ‘god’
……..he hasn’t got enough hair to double for Medusa. Quick, send for the snakes!
This is so sad.
Mann is the patsy, a nobody who was elevated and positioned to carry the message forward.
He’s not the Jerry Sandusky of Climate Science…he’s the Lee Harvey Oswald of Climate Science.
Very well said, but may I start from your premise and develop it just a bit more? I would argue that Mann was the Jack Ruby of global warming.
Whereas Hanson, Holdren et al represent Oswald, in that they actively worked to kill rational climate science, Mann swept in afterwards to “clean up” the untidy inconsistencies of their predictions and the inconveniences of climate history.
Fair enough…!
Yes. Very good. Now, who is the second gun??
One argument would be that the “second gun” argument was a straw-man intended to confuse the general public, misdirect attention, and obscure the audacity of the original “assassination” and the subsequent “cleanup” by co-conspirateurs. In this case the Koch Bros might be accused of being the “second guns” .
Oops, my reply is in moderation… it was probably the ass* word…. or the gu* word
My God, what an amazingly, frighteningly, unattractive combination of goatee and carefully manglecured baldness. I can never unsee that.
Why would you think this is a cogent point? How sad.
who said I can’t be petty?
Now, now… let’s take away something positive from this video…
.
.
.
.
.
.
Okay. I give up.
On the poster: “global uncertainty”.
Sure. Because climate, and everything were so “certain” until Man came along.
No – it was never certain and that is how they operate. To the uninformed public they project certainty. But to the informed (those not on the payroll,) they hide behind an imprecise and complex science to say: ‘catch me out if you can’.
They were not prepared for the likes of WUWT, The Galileo Movement, Jo Nova and many others that are now catching them out – big time.
‘Imprecise’ – are you sure that’s the word?
After this object lesson from the learned professor, I trust no one reading will indulge in the narrative fallacy, the witch doctor’s tool.
What is it, one may ask? Squeezing explanation from a mere sequence of facts, that are points on an epistemological map of fractally complex reality, without even looking for intervening contradictions.
Mikey fashions himself as a “reluctant” warrior in the Climate Wars, and as a “victim”. His “poor me” facade is just cover for his passive aggression, though. The truth is he loves being in the limelight, viewing himself as a hero for the Cause. The lies he tells have become part of him now, and are part of his pathology.
There is either a jail cell waiting for him or a strait jacket, hard to say which.
More like a War on Science.
Or …., if he is the “Magic Mathematician” as someone else was the “Magic Negro,” all that pathological l–yi-1ing will get him a seat behind the desk in the Oval Office… .
I cannot stomach the obfuscation. This mann is….well I better not.
Sorry, this is perhaps adhominem and gratuitis but Mann in full frontal has a face like a weasel.
It’s just that it is compelling that someone who acts like weasel has a weasel face.
That reminded me of a famous Abraham Lincoln quote (from memory, only, here):
Lincoln: No, don’t hire him. I don’t like his face.
Aide: His face?!
Lincoln: Before age 45, you can’t help your demeanor… after 45,
“… but the opening scene shows picture of cooling towers emitting steam…”
Why is it that the supporters of CAGW continuously must use deceptions, half-truths, and out-right false information to support their belief?
Ah, I got the answer from a scorpion: “it is their nature”.
Yes, and another thing — l1es are all they have.
He says “What I wouldn’t be able to explain to you as a scientist would be if the earth were not warming up as a result of that” (increased CO2). He can’t explain the 18-year “Pause” in warming, so he acts as if it doesn’t exist. It doesn’t fit with his narrative. Typical.
Bristol University, THE “Centre of Excrement in Climate Science”
Was he over there interviewing for a job ?
Can you imagine Mann and the king of pop-psychologist at the same place , would the mass of those combined ego’s create its own black whole sucking all light and logical thought form the climate ‘science’ universe or have we already gone past that event horizon ?
Wow. I’ve never actually watched him on Video. I’m a EE/Radio Frequency engineer by trade. I consider Joseph Fourier to be one of my heroes. To see this guy show a slide of him in this context makes me feel ill. Seems like Mann has figured out that he can fool some of the people some of the time, and get paid for it. I’ve worked with guys like this in the past. To quote a line from my favorite song writer, from Austin, TX, Bob Schneider, “That guy’s a dickhead. And anyone can tell”. That’s all I’ll say.
I wonder how many times I’ve seen the same talk by Mann?
I just looked through both this one and his talk at TAM – The Amazing Meeting hosted by the James Randi Foundation.
And it is (almost) the exact same talk! The slides are the same, talking points are the same, the frases, the pauses for effect and even the little jokes (eg about Sarah Palin) to make the (mostly sympathetic, lefty, CAGW-leaning) audience snicker.
But there is absolutely nothing new in there. And all the glaring errors and the poor logic he repeats as if it were the pinnacle of wisdom. And by know he knows that he’ll get flak for still only showing temperatures up to 2005, at the very same passage where i accuses skeptics to cherrypick the 1998-year as starting point for the pause.
It’s 2014. Mann’s “Hansen was right, ergo models are right, ergo I am right” charts stop in 2005, leaving off an inconvenient decade.Incredible. Somebody should have shouted out.
And, IIRC, his chart is for land-only temperatures, which rose at a higher rate than all-globe.
The guy (MM) is now moving towards the AGW that actually now means not a climatic atmospheric warming but a planetary whole earth’s and globe’s warming….funny and in the same time silly… especially while climate and atmosphere show significant signs of cooling at the moment.
cheers
The best point he made as far as I can tell is while actually he claims to be so good scientifically to
foresee-predicti climate’s and whole earth and glob’s future but he could not even see or foresee where his own so called scientific sh.t-crap would have landed him…..even “petty” does not cut it anymore…very fishy.
Actually makes me very curious about the diet he is on.
cheers
Whine, Whine, Whine! Just as Sir John Houghton whined himself silly about push back from the skeptics (__In the Eye of the Storm: The Autobiography of Sir John Houghton__), here’s Mikey “Bogus Hockey Stick” Mann taking his turn. Climate Change whining doesn’t get any better than this…
Mann really gets in to politics, he spends lots of time trying to discredit skeptics, that tells me he is not a scientist, but a politico.
Oh and BTW he said that CO2 is “getting in to the ocean and causing heating” – did I hear him right?
I wish it included the Q/A part.
I watched parts of it. He’d state the obvious then give it the “We’re All Going To Die Unless…” twist.
And, of course, the paranoid “Everybody’s Out To Get Me” twist. (If there’s nothing to hide, why hide it? How incriminating can data be?)
At least in the parts watched.
But I did like the pans of the audience when I realized that some of those faces are the faces of those who frequent here.
Can you say “straw man?”