‘Supermandia’ doesn’t seem to like questions about Shukla, #RICO20, and The Climate Science Legal Defense Fund

Long time WUWT readers may remember that a defender of “the cause”, Professor Scott Mandia, donned a Halloween costume and professed his love of defending Michael Mann and others who have had to suffer the terrible, terrible, tragedy of people asking Climategate related questions about validity of science, peer review gatekeeping, and funding.

Mike likes the idea:

From Scott Mandia’s blog he captions this photo: The Caped Climate Crusader: Battling the evil forces of global warming deniers. “Faster than global T rise, more powerful than a stranded polar bear, able to leap over rising seas in a single bound.”

He is the founder and operator of the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund, an organization that was started in 2011, mainly as a response to Climategate. From their web page:

CSLDF was started when Scott Mandia posted a “Dear Colleagues” letter on his blog in September 2011.  He wrote, “Climate researchers are in need of immediate legal assistance to prevent their private correspondence from being exposed” via misuse of open records laws.  The outpouring of support was overwhelming, and helped pay for climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann’s legal defense against a massive and invasive records request.  But scientists’ legal bills continued to mount, and Scott Mandia paired with Joshua Wolfe to create CSLDF. Source: http://climatesciencedefensefund.org/about-us/

Today, I got into an unexpected exchange over the word “denialist” with Professor Mandia, and I asked him a question. He responded almost immediately. Here is the exchange:

mandia-tweet1

The reason I thought to ask this was because the recent Shukla debacle was highlighted by Representative Lamar Smith in his preservation letter as:

“IGES appears to be almost fully funded by taxpayer money while simultaneously participating in partisan political activity by requesting a RICO investigation of companies and organizations that disagree with the Obama administration on climate change.

I recalled a comment made at Scott Mandia’s blog by the professor himself that stuck with me all these years. Given the RICO20 and Shukla mess, I thought it worth mentioning again. Here it is (highlight mine):

mandia-get-rich-comment

It seems to me that second “settled fact” might very well become unsettled as the Shukla Congressional investigation saga unravels. And with all that NSF largess in Shukla’s hands, and with the RICO20 letter he spearheaded looking to investigate climate skeptics, I naturally wondered if Shukla had given Mandia’s Climate Science Legal Defense Fund some money. It seemed like a valid question to ask.

Later in the Twitter thread, after Mandia threw out the Lewandowsky style “conspiracy” grenade, I asked again:

mandia-tweet2

The last two questions were over a space of about 40 minutes, so it seems like he doesn’t wish to answer whether the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund has been the recipient of any money from Shukla and/or his IGES/COLA enterprise.

Now in fairness, he may just be pissed off that I asked such a question, and there may be nothing there at all. But I have to wonder why he wouldn’t at least address the question, because to not do so only invites more questions IMHO. It’s a curiosity.

If professor Mandia does respond here, I’ll elevate his comments to the body of the post to clear up any and all questions. I just checked Twitter feed again (now 4 hours later) and still no response.

Advertisements

194 thoughts on “‘Supermandia’ doesn’t seem to like questions about Shukla, #RICO20, and The Climate Science Legal Defense Fund

      • Well Supermandia put his foot in it right away, in stating that the USA is primarily responsible for the CO2 that is in the air.

        Sorry Scott, you couldn’t be more wrong.

        The USA is a net carbon SINK, not a SOURCE, and what’s more it is the ONLY land based NET CARBON SINK on the planet; of any size.

        There are others of course like New Zealand, which is also a heavily agricultural and tree farming country, but it is very small compared to the USA.

        So we in America, are more of the solution (to a non-problem) than the principal source of that non problem.

        g

      • George: The US dropped to the second largest producer of CO2 years ago, and if India hasn’t passed us yet, it will soon. If you add up all the countries of the world I doubt the US produces much more than of all the CO2 being added to the air each year.
        So this belief that we are primarily responsible could only be the work of sick mind. Or one that is impervious to rational thought.
        (Though your comments about sinks is very good, I just wanted to discuss emissions alone.)

    • Yes, he should have taken those off after emerging from the cesspool of Mann’s arrogant nonsense.

  1. PLEASE don’t hold your breath waiting for an answer. To be fair, he may not even know. To be pejorative, you may not get an accurate answer either!

      • So in my misguided academic youth, I learned about an experiment of some sort by Calendar and Barnes.

        Don’t recall hat that experiment was, but it evidently was one of significance. But I never ever heard of either Calendar, or Barnes on their own.

        So what did they do, ad why is Barnes name now expunged ??

        g

    • More censorship from WUWT.

      [you’ve violated blog policy by using multiple identities aka sockpuppets, we aren’t obligated to carry your comments -mod]

      • Mods alerted me to this, all I can say from this example is that data talks, bullshit walks:

        So, whoever you are, don’t let the door hit you in the butt on the way out.

      • While I acknowledge there are a few good reasons to hide behind a fake name, I recognize none that involve others’ identity, even multiple dead people. I’ve used my real name since ARPAnet days in the 1970s without significant trouble.

        If you want me to take you seriously, either use your real name, or use a screen name and explain why you can’t use your real name. Or continue to be an anonymous coward that none of us take seriously.

      • If my original account no longer works on this forum, the only solution is for me to use another account.

        Unless you have a better solution?

        Anyway I have raised the issue with WordPress, and I have included you displaying my email account information on a public forum.

      • The email accounts have been partially obscured, though there’s really [no] risk to you, since you set these emails up specifically to troll WUWT.

        The better solution? Don’t comment here anymore, and don’t create fake accounts and new email addresses to get around the fact that we put sockpuppets in the bit bucket. We aren’t obligated to post your comments.

        [Added, that should have read “The email accounts have now been partially obscured…” By using images, there’s no risk for spam harvesting, but they should have been pixelated while making the point- Anthony]

      • See also our policy page: https://wattsupwiththat.com/about-wuwt/policy/

        Internet phantoms who have cryptic handles, no name, and no real email address get no respect here. If you think your opinion or idea is important, elevate your status by being open and honest. People that use their real name get more respect than phantoms with handles. I encourage open discussion by people that stand behind their words.

        A real working email address that you own (as a commenter) is required, so that I may contact you if needed. False or misleading email addresses may earn banishment. Changing handles and/or changing email addresses to get around this will also earn the same fate.

        Comments coming from proxy servers (to create fake identities) will be deleted.

        Anonymity is not guaranteed on this blog. Posters that use a government or publicly funded IP address that assume false identities for the purpose of hiding their source of opinion while on the taxpayers dime get preferential treatment for full disclosure, ditto for people that make threats.


        Like any establishment, we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone

      • I am happy to go back to using the HT account if it works on this blog – that is the reason I started using a second account in the first place. I prefer to use HT as I want to use only one account across various blogs.

        (That doesn’t make much sense, but using one screen name does. Please stay with the original, or use your real name. -mod)

      • Say what !!

        Seems that the principal censorship going on here is the expungeation of the real identity of Svante Callendar.

        I guess that’s what means the pot calling the kettle black.

        g

      • Lets give him the benefit of the doubt.

        Sméagol was essentially a well meaning guy that liked to eat fish, while Gollum was a nasty killer that was pushed past his emotional point of no return by a shiny piece of gold jewelry.

        Maybe there is a nice fish eater (lets call him Mr. Grey) that is residing in the grey matter right next to Harry and Svante; the poor guy is being repressed and all he needs is the opportunity to sneak out and express himself so he can become empowered to take control away from Svante.

        Frodo gave Sméagol a chance to change, and it only cost him a finger….

      • RicWerme: I have been cyber stalked and fired from a job because of my global warming opinions. So it does happen.

    • Are there any other IPs this guy has used? May be possible to trace which company/organisation the posts are coming from. Its the sort of analysis that Poptech would find easy :)

      • Using his DNS CPE-121-217-23-100.lnse1.cht.bigpond.net.au Bigpond can find the exact address, even to his apartment number, to find him. He’s not very bright or he’d be using a VPN.

      • 121 will be a dynamic IP address, probably for wireless broadband. I use wireless broadband with telstra and my IP will change daily, IP lookup will put me in melbourne one day, then brisbane the next (where i reside), so not much can be gained from IP location unless it is static. the email address however is a different story.

      • heh, at the moment that IPlocationtool places me at cannonvale, nth QLD, about 1000Km north of my actual position with an IP starting with 101.

      • You can’t really hide….in Rockdale?… near intersection of Bestic & William? Nice House!

      • Guys, this is going way too far. Anthony and the mods have all the right to feel angry with this person, but I fear this witch hunt against this wi… er, guy, is starting to look pretty illegal. There are a number of comments already giving away personal information of a third party knowingly unwilling to share it, that should better get snipped just in case.

      • Exposing data that is legally available to anyone who has the knowledge to look for it is borderline illegal?

      • Based on the moderator comments above, I am giving my HT account another try.

        [when you add the word “moderator” the comment is automatically flagged for attention -mod]

      • pols

        Have had Mr. Cooper at our golf club for a few visits over the last few years. loves golf, love fast 60’s American muscle cars..also music…amazed by continued following by young people not born at his height off popularity

    • When the letter to Obama was first revealed I said Trenberth would regret signing his name there. I never thought things would move so fast! I was thinking years and decades down the line.

      • Trenberth attended some symposium earlier this year that IGES appears to have hosted. I’m not sure how closely he’s tied to them. I was rather surprised to see him on the list. I’m sure he regrets it now. I’m tempted to Email him and express my disappointment in his rejection of scientific give-and-take. OTOH, I assume he’s received more invective than most scientists, none of which should be sent.

        It is amazing how quickly this has reached the mail-from-congress stage. I’d love to be able to drop in at GMU’s PR department and ask if they have any press releases ready.

        We need to spread this in news media and social media. The latter needs some silly photo for piquing people’s interest. I wonder if Supermandia would mind if we used his photo. :-)

      • Maybe I can cobble something together using a large PrisonGate and some choice photos of some of these
        folks.

      • Ric, Trenberth is quite close. Used to sit on the IGES Science Advisory Board according to McIntyre. In my world that’s a remunerated position. Plus Advisory Boards like to meet in ‘difficult’ locations. Mine particularly liked Fort Lauderdale in February, at a conference hotel directly on the beach… They also preferred for some strange reason to like meeting on Fridays, although they always booked tickets home on Sunday evenings…

    • Well, he’s (and NCAR/UCAR) still claiming to have shared the Nobel Prize, so he probably has no regrets. The man lacks a moral compass.

  2. Well, I’d look into his funding 8:00 am Monday morning. Seems to me anyone who would go through all the trouble to set up and manage a legal defense fund may, in the back of his mind, someday be the beneficiary of it. …and…is he paid by his defense fund too? Worth asking.

    Like Nixon erasing 18 minutes of tape or Hillary erasing 30,000 email, taking actions in defense of yourself is, in U.S. law, admissible evidence of the knowledge of guilt.

    So Scott Mandia. Let us see your books. All of them.

  3. Clearly the warmists are highly organized, yet their proposition is false, otherwise they would have been able to shut this debate down long ago. It was not for lack of trying,” the science is settled” etc. As if science is some sort of turkey dressed and roasted for Thanksgiving.

    That in itself identifies the weakness of their proposition. Refusing to debate and release documents are dead giveaways that they are up to something poor.

    • Yes. Brainwashed, perhaps? When I see a professor that holds a BS and MS in meteorology dressed in tights and cape, wielding a hockey stick, a recent article in Consumer Reports immediately comes to mind. The Nov. 2015 print version of CR has a heartbreaking cover story, Lies, Secrets and Scams, about the elderly being scammed out of billions of dollars each year. (Kind of like how taxpayers are scammed out of billions of dollars each year, in part by the likes of the Shukla family and IGES.) An FBI agent, Debbie Deem, who is a victim specialist, provides some information for the article.
      “To get through to the victims and encourage them to stop, Deem tries to reveal the scams’ contradictions. But even when the hustlers are unmasked, some lonely victims appear not to care that they are being duped.”

      Paraphrasing Agent Deem, to the scammed, the scammers are their friends.

  4. “Faster than global T rise, more powerful than a stranded polar bear, able to leap over rising seas in a single bound.”

    Did they leap? They survived though.

    3. A final peak of bowhead bones dated about 1.5–0.75 ka has been found in all three regions, suggesting an open Northwest Passage during at least some summers. During this interval the bowhead-hunting Thule Inuit (Eskimo) expanded eastward out of the BERING SEA region and ultimately spread to GREENLAND and Labrador
    http://web.archive.org/web/20130510233154/http://downloads.climatescience.gov/sap/sap1-2/sap1-2-final-report-all.pdf

    • Hey! Another nice link, Jimbo. You are a wizard.

      Mark “Arctic-Death-Spiral” Serreze contributes significantly to the report. I found Chapter 3 quite interesting. A couple of graphs in the report show the descent from past warm times into the Earth’s current Ice Age (scales are millions of years). You look at those graphs and wonder how anyone can pronounce this year or any year in the past 3-15 million years as the “warmest evah!” That’s pure rhetoric vs. generally agreed upon paleo-reconstructions.

      Along with the could-maybe-possibly-based-on-models-and-assuming-Dorothy-and-Toto-make-it-back-from-Oz crap there were some good, solid observational studies included in the report. Subtracting the speculation from the observations, my personal takeaway is that researchers aren’t being paid to point out the implications of the bad news – the Earth is in an Ice Age.

  5. It is possible that Prof. Mandia is suffering serious cognitive dissonance. He may sincerely believe that scientists should not get rich off research grants. That would put him in the position of having to defend the indefensible.

    The Climategate emails could be explained away with a bit of creative rationalizing. Michael Mann’s hockey stick is still being defended by its author. Scott Mandia can maintain his psychological defenses intact.

    Shukla is a different kettle of fish. Mandia may be feeling quite uncomfortable.

    • Bob,

      Rich vs well off, these professors are paid anywhere between 120 and 250 thousand tenure? Last financial year, I just scrapped over 100 with bonuses and I was pretty happy with that👍.

      These people have been hanging around Al Gore too long, it’s all about the money and to the hell with the science.

      • I taught in various colleges from 1964 to 2007, including serving as a dean and a department chairman, and my pay never exceeded $41,000. Granted, I taught in some less-prominent schools, but I did not feel ill-used at $41K. The salaries cited–to more than $300,000–are obscene. I bet these people teach maybe 20 grad students a couple of times a week, do minimal committee work, and have grad assistants to grade any papers they get. College profs–at least some of them–are the most coddled professionals on the planet. Mostly Democrats, too . . .

      • John M. Ware says:
        October 3, 2015 at 12:33 am

        … College profs–at least some of them–are the most coddled professionals on the planet. …

        At the schools in my vicinity the screws have been tightening in a variety of ways lately. Being a prof. isn’t as comfortable as it used to be.

  6. OK, let’s do this one more time.

    I am asking this question to all the thousands of folks who post/read this blog:

    “Will those of you who are denying that the climate changes please raise your hand?”

    *Notes for the record that no one has his or her hand raised*

      • Some notable Greeks in ancient times discussed climate change. So did a certain Thomas Jefferson.

        Abstract
        Climatic Change As A Topic In The Classical Greek And Roman Literature
        Abstract
        A search was made of the classical Greek and Roman literature for references to climatic change, irrespective whether facts of observation or views. It was found that several scholars/scientists of the classical antiquity made pronouncements on the subject
        http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00139058
        =====

        Hugh Williamson – 1770
        [Physician & signatory of the US constitution]
        …He joined other scientists and scholars in conducting experiments and is thought to have collaborated with Benjamin Franklin while in England. His “Observations on Climate” (1770) won him recognition among European scientists, and…
        http://ncpedia.org/biography/williamson-hugh
        =====

        America’s First Great Global Warming Debate – [1799 – Thomas Jefferson V….]

      • I’m sorry Jimbo, but if there are ancient Greeks and Thomas Jefferson’s name on the list of folks who did not raise their hands, the Warmists will claim our vote was tainted.

        /grin

    • Well Who, just fly from the middle Sahara on some August mid afternoon to Vostok base, and lemme know if the climate changes any.

      Well it’s not supposed to because the Temperature anomalies are within a degree or so of each other, so they should have the same climate according to Dr. Jim Hansen.

      g

  7. I don’t do twitter. So, please direct him to the link that includes the letter from the Congressman which compels him as well not to delete any information he may have it he did receive a donation.

  8. Guidestar says it is: a not for profit.
    Basic Organization Information

    Climate Science Legal Defense Fund
    Physical Address: Brooklyn, NY 11201
    EIN: 47-1941171
    However, the IRS has no filings of 990 on file. And since it was launched in Sept 2011 one
    would think that these science minded people would follow some rules, say what the IRS says
    is their fiduciary duty.

    Hmm…. 5 years no filings on file with the IRS (via their exempt organization searchable database.)

  9. I spent a good bit of time trying to locate Shukla’s home address…no joy. While I would never publish his home address, I would gladly post pics of his house, as he no doubt lives large on our dime.

    Anyone with access to pay walled “white page” sites who wants to help, should start by looking in Rockville MD. It would be interesting to know if Shukla uses his non-profit to get over on property taxes.

    If you manage to come up with an address, just use google earth or Zillow to obtain pics of the dwelling. Do not post his home address.

    • You really didn’t try very hard.

      It’s a nice house, in a very nice neighborhood, but it’s not a touch on some up in, say, Smoke Rise, NJ.

  10. Super Mandia’s organization is no longer listed with the IRS as tax exempt, but that doesn’t mean that status has been rescinded. Can’t seem to locate their form 990, either.

    • I am a non practicing lawyer, but not a tax lawyer. But still deal with this stuff in both US and Canada, gothnin business and since I am a member of a tax free association that owns a condoed Canadian vacation property. The general rule in both countries is, if you don’t file the requisite forms annually, you lose the tax status. I had to deal with remediation, engaging expert tax lawyers. As a rule of thumb, you get one years forgivness. Mistakes happen, and tax authorities recognize that. Especially for small tax exempts that may not be adequately staffed or supported. Two years, you are in deep trouble. Three years, and you are OUT! Some sort of a strike three baseball anology rule, I suppose. Just is.

      • If you look at the “may know these people” section in the white pages, it would appear the answer is “no”.

  11. Climate Science Legal Defense Fund claims to be a 501 (C)(3) organization. Where are its 990s and does it disclose a list of donors and individuals/organizations it grants money to?

    • From the SLDF website:

      “CLSDF was originally hosted as a part of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), but has since become an independent 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.”

  12. In the revealingly costumed Dr. Mandia we have the Social Justice Warrior (SJW) mentality rampant.

    SJWs do not engage in rational debate because they are not rational, and they do not engage in honest discourse because they do not believe in objective truth. They do not compromise because the pure spirit of enlightened progressive social justice dare not sully itself with the evil of the outdated Endarkenment. They are the emotion-driven rhetoric-speakers of whom Aristotle wrote: “Before some audiences not even the possession of the exactest knowledge will make it easy for what we say to produce conviction. For argument based on knowledge implies instruction, and there are people whom one cannot instruct.”

    — Vox Day, SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police (2015)

    Keep trying for a reasoned exchange with Dr. Mandia, Anthony.

    But don’t hold your breath.

  13. I can imagine on the day of the RICO20 plus Shukla testimony before the congressional committee their defense attorney will say for the record, “Dear Mr. Chairman. My clients wish to claim their 5th Amendment protection and not testify”, while on the steps of Congress the Shukla Family Choir gives a rendition of ‘Edelweiss’ for the press.

    Ha ha

  14. One would expect that the grant makers will exact accountability and producibles as detailed and agreed to in the grant contract. Publicly funded grants are subject to accounting rules and IRS oversight. With tens of millions allocated to Shukla et al, the auditing of said funding would be / should be very thorough. Unless of course there is a directive from on high to not exercise such auditing. As with any crime, follow the money.

  15. please keep the pressure on, on all fronts. many are watching, but we need many more. it is time to blow the cover off these “scientists”. keep the moral high ground! post if you need support.

  16. This is curious.

    http://climatesciencedefensefund.org has a button marked “donate.” It leaves the site and goes to http://www.lcatrust.org/fsp/csldf/ . That is owned by a group called Land Conservation and Advocacy Trust. They appear to offer to maintain funding accounts, http://www.lcatrust.org/fs/ says:

    LCAT Legal offers fiscal sponsorship services to individuals and projects that do not have 501(c)(3) non-profit tax-exempt status. Tax-exempt status is required by many foundations, corporations and government agencies in order to be eligible for funding. As a fiscal sponsor, LCAT acts as an umbrella organization for an individual or project and accepts and administers funds on its behalf.

    Their current Sponsored Projects include:

    Astore Quarry Restoration
    Climate Science Legal Defense Fund
    Framingham Earth Day Festival
    Sarah and Peter Clayes House Trust
    The Lost Arts Collaborative of North America
    Transition Framingham
    Sawah Bali

    Note that none of this implies that the CSLDF is not a 501(c)3 organization, but it does suggest that any funds would show up on their IRS 990. Lo and behold, there are some. Lo and behold, they only post them for 2009 and 2010. The 2010 filing shows only $16K in income and 4 unpaid officers. That’s before the CSLDF was formed. I’ll poke around some for later 990s, and post back if I find any.

    http://www.lcatrust.org/about-lcat/facts-and-figures/financial-information/

  17. Anthony – someone that has access to the IRS Form 990s may want to check the Grant Schedule to see if the Defense fund is listed as a recipient of any Grants made by IGES. If IGES paid legal fees, one would probably have to examine the books and records to make that determination.

    • The CSLDF has not submitted anything to the IRS.

      Per Guidestar.org

      “Legitimacy Information
      This organization is not registered with the IRS.
      This organization is required to file an IRS Form 990-N.
      This organization does not appear in the IRS’s most recent list of tax-exempt organizations. IRS records do not, however, indicate that the organization’s tax-exempt status has been revoked. Contact the organization for more information.”

      A couple of posts have noted they probably have little income. Even if they had less than $50k annual income they would still need to report a 990-N

      I think there’s something up here.

      The have an announcement about the hiring of their first Executive Director
      http://web.law.columbia.edu/climate-change/about-center/staff-and-affiliates/lauren-kurtz

      NO WAY the cost of this hire is less than $150k so they have well over $50k in revenues and are not filing required returns.

  18. One of the great ironies of this entire situation is that those who use the word “D**ier” are, in fact, the ones who are denying facts and data.
    Like most of us here, I also believed in the great AGW hypothesis. Unlike those who are making their living from it, I was unable to find credible evidence that it was true. In fact, within a day or two of looking around (and this was more than 10 years ago, when ALL the internet stuff was pro-AGW) I soon realized that the reason I could not find credible evidence is that there IS no credible evidence.
    I keep looking for credible evidence. I keep not finding any. The obvious conclusion is that there is no credible evidence to be found, just a lot of people who believe with religious fervor and refuse to recognize that what “evidence” they see is not even remotely credible.

    • “Like most of us here, I also believed in the great AGW hypothesis.”

      I’m not sure I agree with your assertion. I tend to think that “most of us here” never believed in it at all, or at least to any serious degree. I mean, Al Gore’s movie came out about 10 years ago and I remember thinking what a load of crap it sounded like, and so did most of the people I know. Just sayin…

      • It seemed pretty believable in 98 and 99, when we had that warm surge. However, by 9/11 I was already fully aware of the fakeness of it all. I was emailing with John Daly and had ditched the tree-planting business before I moved into my house, which I bought when the prices dipped after 9/11.

        So, instead of “most of us”, I’ll say “many of us”. It was AFTER my epiphany that the politicians started jumping on the bandwagon.

        Watching from that perspective, these last 14 years have been like watching a circus.

      • Aphan,
        You are describing the CAGW hypothesis. He only claimed to believe the AGW i.e. that human activities cause the temperature to rise some. I am not convinced the “some” is at all significant compared to natural variability, but that was not the issue he raised. That catastrophic “C” makes a great deal of difference. I think most of us thought Al Gore was (and still is to this day) full of anti-scientific nonsense.

      • I once believed that a doubling ofCO2 might be able temperature by about 2C. The recent science has convinced me that the correct number is more like 0.2C.

      • well even i did believe in the possibility of the AGW hypothesis. But that was before the Al gore movie.

        then one logical question came up “what did climate do in the past?” and read the GISP and GISP2 ice core report (oh yes the full 300+ boringly written pages paper) and even if the writing style was boring, the info was very eye opening.

        Since reading that report i understood that glaciations and interstadials are more volatile then first thought etc etc and realized that this whole debate is handling about a fractio of what climate really can throw at us without the need of that molecule called CO2.

        Since then i don’t buy the IPCC and all the alarmist stuff anymore knowing that in earth’s history climate has been ways warmer then now (and any of the IPCC models) and ways colder and nobody will be able to tell which way it will go. All i know is that a next period of glaciation will take place somewhere in the future millenia like it did before and that afterwards it will warm up again… etc untill the earth will come out of this ice episode like it did before. And so on…..

        now they changed it into “climate change” Well i understood one thing: the only constant of our climate is….
        that it changes

        now i do believe that we contribute to “some” of that change, but that most of this “some” is mainly due to land use. and that CO2 is just a tiny fraction that is negligeable

  19. Well the was right on about one thing, as he says in his remarks to Kelly: (last paragraph)
    “Solving the climate change problem offers tremendous economic opportunity”

    Sure does, if you are on the good side of those handing out our tax payer dollars.

      • We all knew what you meant, don’t ya hate it when a really good comment includes a typo.
        Any waves coming from the Atlantic side ?

      • u.k.(us) October 2, 2015 at 5:25 pm
        “Any waves coming from the Atlantic side ?”

        No they don’t come over here. However, the wind is blowing around 20 mph towards Joaquin and that caused some rough surf in the Gulf. Good enough to body surf which is where I was earlier this afternoon.

  20. Jees I miss a ThumbUp button on here . Says a lot with a click .

    I went on Twitter to see what that Denial101x graphic really says . It’s astoundingly stupid : the 31,000 quants who signed the Oregon Global Warming petition is a small fraction of the 12,700,000 graduates in those fields .

    Who knew !!

    Do these people think that they think ?

    • That is 31,000 more then have ever signed a petition saying human emissions of CO2 will cause catastrophic T rise, catastrophic SL rise, catastrophic increase in extreme weather, catastrophic increase in droughts, catastrophic increase in floods, catastrophic increase in the dozens of everything as claimed by CAGW proponents.

      BTW, the facts support the skeptical scientist who signed the petition, as ZERO of the alarmist predictions have manifested. Bottom line; 31,000 correct skeptics, Over 30,000 wrong predictions by CAGW proponents.

  21. “But scientists’ legal bills continued to mount, and Scott Mandia paired with Joshua Wolfe to create CSLDF. Source: http://climatesciencedefensefund.org/about-us/

    The fund looks like it’s about to be tapped out if Shukla is only the small part of the iceberg sticking out. Thinking that one would need such a fund says plenty about climate scientists annointed by the Bishopric of CliSci.

    The irony of the juxtaposition of a graph showing 97% support for CAGW science and the dreadful measures proposed by them for the other 3% is also very telling. Why would one worry about a meagre 3% of dissent? Has this so-called 3% struck terror into the hearts and minds of the faithful with mere words?

    No, what has happened is the 20yr ‘pause’ (I homogenized the length of the period by adding a year and a half to account for the bias in temperature records) has caused their own minds to have the thinnest edges of skeptical thoughts trying to push through. The mind is a wonderful thing. If you reject the hints of truth it is trying to give you, by (I can’t use the D word here) ah…disavowal, it will literally make you sick – hence, the birth of the climate science blues (I can hear a nice minor pentatonic base run here). Those with more cement in their heads began to worry about an epidemic so they held their noses and yanked an upslope into the pause to get rid of this threat. This desperate measure won’t work, of course, but it will carry them through Paris, I guess. Next, I guess they will correct the record by taking temperatures of the spray from whale blowholes when the ships start taking in cold water.

    • I find it fascinating that they are willing to spend so much of their own money to make sure the public is not able to see their work, and their conversations about their work.

  22. Wow! “Denial” in the truest psychological sense of the word from Mandia. It’s creepy to the max.
    It’s also pathetic that those of his ilk have yet to figure out that virtually no one denies there is a climate and that they sound intellectually disabled and stuck at a developmental level of about 12 years old..

  23. I’m eating my popcorn while reading this thread and wondering how many warmers are also reading it and starting to get VERY nervous. All of the information being gathered here is readily available on the internet, and there are some very clever participants on WUWT, so it doesn’t take a genius to realize that connections are being made, discovery is taking place, and people with just basic access are beginning to form a very interesting picture. In panic, will they remove information that has already been screen capped or way backed? That would be fun to watch. Will they remain silent and hope that the S.S. Shukla et al sinks quietly without being tied to them? That Disappearing Defense Fund is going to need a lot more donations.

    I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m imagining an inordinate number of hairy little vermin plopping into the water and trying to swim to the closest patch of sea ice they can find. Good thing there’s lot of it now. *grin*

  24. some may recall Nuccitelli’s Guardian piece directed readers to a petition:

    29 Sept: Guardian: Dana Nuccitelli: Is the fossil fuel industry, like the tobacco industry, guilty of racketeering?
    Journalists investigated Exxon’s rejection of its own science to deceive the public. Scientists call for the Justice Department to investigate
    Climate Hawks Vote has created a petition asking the Attorney General to launch a RICO investigation of Exxon and other fossil fuel companies.
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/sep/29/is-the-fossil-fuel-industry-like-the-tobacco-industry-guilty-of-racketeering

    929 signatures, and counting. doubt anyone signing has a clue about the Shukla/GMU revelations:

    ClimateHawksVote Petition
    Tell U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch:
    Launch a RICO prosecution of Exxon and its fellow fossil-fuel companies for deliberate and malicious climate deception.
    http://www.climatehawksvote.com/prosecute_exxon

    Wikipedia: Climate Hawks Vote
    Co-founder and chair RL Miller is an activist, blogger, and chair of the California Democratic Party’s environmental caucus. The other founder is Hunter Cutting, Director of Strategic Communications at Climate Nexus…

  25. The problem (beyond climate) is that the best professors now are really really good salespeople, not so much scientists. I’ve worked with high level sales executives in big pharma that aren’t nearly as skilled as some of these university professors. A quick perusal of Shukla’s CV gives me bad vibes. Every good sales person or politician has a underlying story.

    As an example,

    Carly Fiorina – she went from secretary to CEO of HP in her own words. She is an example how the little gal can succeed. Sounds good doesn’t it. Another rags to riches story through perseverance and overcoming the odds. Except she was never a secretary at HP. Maybe a secretary in HS/College before going to UCLA law school or UMD b-school but who hasn’t had a menial job in HS or college.

    Now back to Shukla, from his own resume and background.

    Primary School (1953) – Under a banyan tree; village – Mirdha, Ballia, U.P., India

    Yes, this is on his professional resume, his primary school education. He actually had to read by candlelight just like Abraham Lincoln too.

    The sheer fact this line item is even on his resume should set off the bullshit detector.

    J. Shukla was born in 1944 in a small village (Mirdha) in the Ballia district of Uttar Pradesh, India. This village had no electricity, no roads or transportation, and no primary school building. Most of his primary school education was received under a large banyan tree.

    Here are a couple of the institutions that he founded that we should look into as well.

    National Center for Medium Range Weather Forecasting (NCMRWF), New Delhi, India
    Physics of Weather and Climate, ICTP, Trieste, Italy
    CPTEC, Brazil, Organizer training of Brazilian scientists at COLA
    International Pacific Research Center (IPRC), U. Of Hawaii, Co-author, Initial Science Plan.
    International Research Institute for Climate Prediction

    This is going to be like pulling on a roll of toilet paper.

    • Anyone else notice a pattern with the current US administration and cronyism/favoritism, to the point of the FBI investigating and raiding the offices of US Fed government’s “CTO” friends’ businesses and offices?
      Criminal nepotism?
      Does the US Fed government really need a politicized office of the “CTO”?

      I’m “with” the comments above, on US government-preferred immigrant classes and political pandering. To add specific names and organizations:

      Search for yourselves:

      Aneesh Chopra, Chief Technology Officer (CTO)

      Vivek Kundra

      Sushal Bansal

      FBI

      Optimal Solutions and Technologies

      GRPA

    • Ballia district in India. This is where Shukla has bout his community college. There are links in the IGES webpage to this college, http://www.iges.org/gandhicollege/. Look at the ABOUT page and the links in the side bar as well. Be sure to use http:// not https://

    • You need to find a better example.

      “I started as a secretary, typing and filing for a nine-person real estate firm. It’s only in this country that you can go from being a secretary to chief executive of the largest tech company in the world, and run for president of the United States. It’s only possible here.”

      — Business executive Carly Fiorina (R), interview on “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon,” Sept. 21, 2015

  26. “CSLDF was started when Scott Mandia posted a “Dear Colleagues” letter on his blog in September 2011. He wrote, “Climate researchers are in need of immediate legal assistance to prevent their private correspondence from being exposed” via misuse of open records laws. The outpouring of support was overwhelming, and helped pay for climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann’s legal defense against a massive and invasive records request. But scientists’ legal bills continued to mount, and Scott Mandia paired with Joshua Wolfe to create CSLDF.”
    “However, the IRS has no filings of 990 on file. it was launched in Sept 2011.
    The 2010 filing shows only $16K in income and 4 unpaid officers. That’s before the CSLDF was formed.”

    “The outpouring of support was overwhelming,”

    but as usual probably raised very few actual dollars.
    No requests for further donations by Prof Mandia so probably a very small amount of money with no activity hence no pressure to fill in forms.
    Unless some money has “disappeared” there is probably nothing to see here.
    How many other ethical scientists are using similar structures to cover their incomes is the real question.
    Buckets should be the answer.
    If Trenberth did have ties with Shukla he is one who might have learnt about it.

    • Tom J. I could not find any evidence that Scott Mandia is from Oz, neither the one in the Antipodes or in Kansas.

  27. George E. Smith October 2, 2015 at 3:17 pm

    Well Supermandia put his foot in it right away, in stating that the USA is primarily responsible for the CO2 that is in the air.

    Sorry Scott, you couldn’t be more wrong.

    The USA is a net carbon SINK, not a SOURCE, and what’s more it is the ONLY land based NET CARBON SINK on the planet; of any size.

    There are others of course like New Zealand, which is also a heavily agricultural and tree farming country, but it is very small compared to the USA.

    So we in America, are more of the solution (to a non-problem) than the principal source of that non problem.

    ////////////////////////////////////////

    Earlier this year (or at any rate sometime after OCO-2 released its first data presentation), Willis did an article on net sinks. Australia was by far the largest net carbon sink. Land area may be slightly less, but net figures as a CO2 sink put it way ahead of the United States.

    But what is clear that despite having not implemented Kyoto, due to fracking and the switch to gas, the US has reduced its CO2 emissions more than any other developed country these past 10 or so years. It is the world leader in reducing CO2 emissions (not that I consider that there is any evidence that withstands scientific scrutiny that suggests that it is necessary to reduce CO2 emissions)..

    • is the massive decline IN manufacturing and production a goodly part of that?
      and cheap? fuel is only good if you have a job to travel to and can afford it at whatever price.
      looking at the jobs/production/massive stock inventory over at Zero Hedge
      methinks any lowering isnt due to bummer n epa as much as depression hitting.

    • The OCO-2 just takes a snapshot. What was being referred to was the 20th century reforestation of north America (Canada and the US, really) which has been dramatic and calculated the region to have been a net sink for the century as a whole – and during the time of the recent rise of CO2 levels claimed as the cause of the most recent global temperature increase.

      Of course, this is based on a large number of estimates which people can reasonably disagree over, but Prof. Mandia’s claim that the US is primarily responsible for the CO2 is demonstrably not true: There are a great many more nations with a much larger net CO2 balance during the second half of the 20th century, chiefly the USSR and the rapidly industrialising nations of SE Asia all of which not only massively increased energy production, but this was accompanied with harvest and utilisation of large areas of forest which have not yet been replaced.

  28. I reached the conclusion a few weeks ago that anyone who types out sigh in a forum or chat, directed at another person, is a total douchebag. Prof Mandia’s tweet lives down to my expectations.

  29. A serious problem of any scientist calling other scientists “deniers” is that the accusation means that the person making it is not respecting the scientific method itself where others are actually required to question your assertions. To claim another scientist is a “denier” is to assert that you are not a scientist yourself as you are asserting that the scientific method is not to be followed.

    • This is an excellent point that everyone should take note of.
      I would like to borrow this, for use as rebuttal, when I hear the phrase bandied about.

  30. I have decided to be polite and call anyone who uses the term “denier” an illiterate imbecile.

    The politeness comes by PROVING to the the fellow carefully, with data, that he IS illiterate and that his understanding IS at or below a 10 year old level, the clinical definition of imbecility. Finding such proofs is remarkably easy.

    When answered in such a polite manner, the addressee will realize: “This nice man, whom I mistakenly called “denier” without detailing the measurements he denied, had nothing personal against me. He simply proved that I was illiterate and imbecile, which is something I should be aware of…”

    PS One should be careful, though. Someone who makes more than $1m/year off the scam may be offended when called “illiterate imbecile” rather than the more appropriate “shameless crook.”

    PPS A few decades ago, women were subject to slights and verbal abuse. They answered politely, with “you are a sexist pig,” and the quality of the discourse improved considerably since.

  31. So are the rubber boots for the rising ocean tides or for the rising piles of climate change activist manure.

  32. I’ve wondered how the CSLDF spends its money, if it is a 501c(3) then it cannot be run for the benefit of individuals, which means if it is funding Dr Mann’s legal fees and that is a significant percent of its expenses it might have to lose its 501c(3) status.

  33. One can see the nature of Mandia’s ideological dogma by the climate scientists he chooses not to support in legal defend funding and the ones he chooses to.

    John

  34. Still no reply from Mandia? And from all fictional heroes, why did he pick one from the previous millennium? Should have thought of the children with something more current, represented also by his own species. Say Green Lantern. Wait, I forgot. It works only with courage. Oh well, nice boots though.

  35. TO SCOTT MANDIA –
    Please respond. There are tens of thousands of people reading this blog. We would like to hear your thoughts on this. We won’t go away.

  36. I’d love to see the books for Mandia. I’d love to see just how much involvement Penn State has with his little fund. Case law is clear. If your employer is funneling money to your “legal defense fund” its taxable income. I would love to see Mann get hit with a massive tax bill for his little law suit.

    • I’d be very surprised if Penn State has donated anything. Even it it (they – both CSLDF and that land trust) had a useful balance, I’d be surprised if anything came from Penn.

      I’d also expect Mann to be funding things through friends with money or a percentage of any winnings.

      • The case law for employers and legal funds doesn’t come from a case where the employer directly depostied money either. They simply helped set it up and encouraged donations.

        “Revenue rulings and other tax authorities set a high bar for finding a gift in connection with contributions either to legal defense funds or to politicians. In Rev. Rul. 60-14,30 sums contributed to a committee organized to raise funds for a taxpayer’s legal defense were income to the taxpayer and not gifts. The taxpayer, an official of an organization, was involved in litigation of a personal nature, but the litigation focused national attention on the organization. Although money contributed would go to pay the individual’s litigation costs, the officials of the organization formed the legal defense committee “for the professed purpose of counteracting unfavorable publicity” and raised funds from members of the organization. The committee made regular reports to the organization’s executive board. Excess funds were turned over to the organization. On those facts, the funds expended by the committee were not gifts to the taxpayer but constituted gross income to him. The committee’s aim of benefiting the organization indicated lack of donative intent.”

        I’d love to see just how involved Penn State is with Mandia’s little project.

  37. Don’t count on getting an answer.

    “That humans are warming the planet is a settled fact”

    The man does not live in the real world, he only sees what he wants to see.

Comments are closed.