Mann's Climate Madhouse Effect

From Mike Mann’s Facebook page:

Cover of my new book w/ Tom Toles due out in September, “The ‪#‎MadHouseEffect‬: How Climate Change Denial is Threatening our Planet, Destroying our Politics, and Driving us Crazy”

Manns-madhouse

I’d say when it comes to being driven crazy, it’s too late for Dr. Mann, because Barack O’Bama says:

obama-mentally-ill

It’s the heat, not the humility, apparently. Mann’s book will likely be a howler, not because it will be funny, but because Mann’s so dead pan humorless, his attempt at being humorous will likely backfire just as badly as his attempts to conjure statistically significant warming trends from dead trees. He’ll need more than just “Mike’s Nature Trick” to pull that off.  I’m sure he’ll take some potshots at all the usual players, including Mark Stein, and maybe yours truly.

Meanwhile, Mann already has the book on his curriculum vitae, even though it’s not actually published yet, and won’t be until September.

mann-madhouse-cv

We live in interesting times.

 

Advertisements

105 thoughts on “Mann's Climate Madhouse Effect

  1. Another Climate Alarmist Admits Real Motive Behind Warming Scare
    The climate alarmists want the public to think they are trying to avoid a burnt world, but what they really want is something altogether different. (AP)
    ·
    ·
    ·
    Reprints
    Fraud: While the global warming alarmists have done a good job of spreading fright, they haven’t been so good at hiding their real motivation. Yet another one has slipped up and revealed the catalyst driving the climate scare.
    We have been told now for almost three decades that man has to change his ways or his fossil-fuel emissions will scorch Earth with catastrophic warming. Scientists, politicians and activists have maintained the narrative that their concern is only about caring for our planet and its inhabitants. But this is simply not true. The narrative is a ruse. They are after something entirely different.
    If they were honest, the climate alarmists would admit that they are not working feverishly to hold down global temperatures — they would acknowledge that they are instead consumed with the goal of holding down capitalism and establishing a global welfare state.
    Have doubts? Then listen to the words of former United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer:
    “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole,” said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015.
    So what is the goal of environmental policy?
    “We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy,” said Edenhofer.
    For those who want to believe that maybe Edenhofer just misspoke and doesn’t really mean that, consider that a little more than five years ago he also said that “The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated.”
    Mad as they are, Edenhofer’s comments are nevertheless consistent with other alarmists who have spilled the movement’s dirty secret. Last year, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, made a similar statement:
    “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,”
    She said in anticipation of last year’s Paris climate summit:
    “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”
    Their plan is to allow Third World countries to emit as much carbon dioxide as they wish — because, as Edenhofer said:
    “In order to get rich one has to burn coal, oil or gas” — while at the same time restricting emissions in advanced nations. This will, of course, choke economic growth in developed nations, but they deserve that fate as “they have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community,”.
    The fanaticism runs so deep that one professor has even suggested that we need to plunge ourselves into a depression to fight global warming.
    Perhaps Naomi Klein summed up best what the warming the fuss is all about in her book This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate.
    “What if global warming isn’t only a crisis?” Klein asks in a preview of a documentary inspired by her book. “What if it’s the best chance we’re ever going to get to build a better world?”
    In her mind, the world has to “change, or be changed,” because an “economic system” — meaning free-market capitalism — has caused environmental “wreckage.”
    This is how the global warming alarmist community thinks. It wants to frighten, intimidate and then assume command. It needs a “crisis” to take advantage of a hobgoblin to menace the people, so that they will beg for protection from the imaginary threat. The alarmists’ “better world” is one in which they rule a global welfare state. They’ve admitted this themselves.

    • Tony, intentionally or otherwise, closely parrots H. L. Mencken’s sage observation about politics …
      “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”

      • Historical tribal pollution was a part of the very existence of such organizations. Hunter gatherer indigenous tribes would move their camp after the forage and potable water became too scarce to support the village. So they would pull up their stakes and move to fresh ground. So much for the idea of undeveloped groups being caretakers of the Earth, which is a myth often presented as truth by decedents of indigenous tribes.

    • This will, of course, choke economic growth in developed nations, but they deserve that fate as they [the developed nations] “have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community,” he said.

      That’s complete bunk. The developed nations have controlled their pollution and, in relative and absolute terms, hardly pollute at all. The third world, on the other hand, pollutes like crazy.

      Pollution, not disease, is the biggest killer in the developing world, taking the lives of more than 8.4 million people each year, a new analysis shows. That’s almost three times the deaths caused by malaria and fourteen times those caused by HIV/AIDs. However, pollution receives a fraction of the interest from the global community. link

      The nations of the developed world are good stewards of the environment, they are not expropriators and defilers. Saying that the developed nations deserve to have their economies choked is pure eco-lunacy, pretty much equivalent to falsely yelling ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.

      • Oops. Damn nested design. I meant to add my comment to commieBob in support of his “bunk” comment.

      • Good point – and the world will get a good look at the difference between how first world economies manage their environment vs how third world economies do (or more accurately – do not) during the upcoming Olympics. If they hold them.

    • A fine comment, Tony Rohl. The more Socialis/Communist a country is, the filthier its environment. But in their usual projection, the UN blames free market economies for their own faults.
      Wannabe dictators like Edenhofer crave power over citizens of the U.S. and the West. They use the climate scare as a means to an end — an end to freedom, and an end to wealth for the common man. Edenhofer, Figures, and their ilk want to be the special ones, lording it over everyone else.
      The sooner we boot the UN out of our country, the better for everyone. Who elected them, anyway?

  2. The fact that they believe that there are people who deny climate should have been the first sign that their friends and/or family should have taken them in for a check-up.

  3. Let’s parse the administration’s comment (in italics, bold mine)
    “Many people will experience adverse mental health outcomes and social impacts from
    OK, sounding pretty serious so far. What’s driving this?
    the threat of climate change,
    the perceived direct experience of climate change,
    and changes to one’s local environment,”

    So…. threats and perception lead the way. Not ACTUAL problems, but the THREAT of problems and the PERCEPTION of problems. Then there are those nasty local changes. What could those be? Like new high rises going in across the street where the park used to be?. ‘Cuz I am betting that would be a far bigger local change for most communities than 0.02 degrees per year for a hundred years.

    • Sure climate is variable, but get this; climate has not maddened lately, but our perception of it sure has.
      Now tell me, which is more variable, climate or human perceptions?
      ========

      • kim on April 4, 2016 at 11:41 pm
        Sure climate is variable, but get this; climate has not maddened lately, but our perception of it sure has.
        Now tell me, which is more variable, climate or human perceptions?
        ========
        Hans –
        > kim on April 4, 2016 at 11:41 pm
        Sure climate
        perception is still Your’s
        but not Matrix’s?
        _________________________
        wholalottamadness download here

    • That has always been the case. Many disorders and phobias are not based on real life situations. For instance, the obsessive character assassination of the American President Obama by right wing pundits leads some potentially psychotic people to believe he really is a major threat to world peace. I saw patients in 1999 who were really scared that various weird religious cults had predicted the end of the world in 2000. We all know about common phobias which are eminently treatable. It’s not just confined to vulnerable lonely individuals. As far as I can see, if Donald Trump really believed that the US President was not born in the US, in spite of the reams of evidence that he was, he probably did have some sort of delusional system in place. That is, if he really did believe that and was not just trying to make mischief. Mental health issues are rarely based on reality.

      • I feel really scared that various religious cults are predicting the end of the world: this is the first time they have got government backing…

      • Gareth, says,,,” For instance, the obsessive character assassination of the American President Obama by right wing pundits leads some potentially psychotic people to believe he really is a major threat to world peace..”
        ==========================
        The O assassinated the head of a foreign state, his Secretary of state bragged about this killing, there was zero follow up and thousands in that region died, and tens of thousands fled to Europe. The entire ME is in shambles, due primarily to actions the US president had taken, which, as far as can be told, have every time supported Islamic extremist, be it a failed attempt to support the MB in Egypt, support of Al Qaeda affiliates in Syria, allowing Iraq, which was improving rapidly under the Bush administration, to fall into complete chaos, and freeing the Iranian regime to pursue their dark interests. He ignores the real threat of Islamic terrorism. (On average about Three Paris attacks a month for years now), He IS bringing in hundreds of thousands of Islamists or potential Islamists every year, a large number of which who will never assimilate into any modern western society. He has driven the US into far greater debt then any predecessor, and greatly weakened the US, creating a global power vacuum. The man is a threat to world peace.
        I have no idea where the O was born. For two decades his own publicist claimed he was foreign born, which is considerably longer than Trump has considered the possibility. Wherever he was born he is fundamentally transforming this nation in the opposite direction of what the US stands for, from a republic of individual rights and liberty, to a statist institution with ever greater Government control of all assets.
        He, like most of his ilk, ever needs a crisis to more fully implement their ideology. So the O has chosen CAGW as a tool in this. “Such is the nature of the Tyrant, when he first appears he is a protector” (Plato) There really is nothing new under the Sun.

      • Gareth Phillips,
        Then I must be delusional. Because I’m still waiting to see a *genuine* birth certificate that was not computer generated. Can you give me a link to one?
        As far as character assassination of the current president, that isn’t possible. One must possess character for it to be assassinated, no?

      • An undocumented birth would explain a lot. Poisonally, I’m of the interpretation that he’s ineligible from his father’s Commonwealth Citizenship.
        It is archaic to believe that ‘natural bornedness’ however defined is adequate guarantee of allegiance.
        This whole matter was always a question of allegiance, and that question has been satisfactorily answered.
        ==================

    • Hmmm. Who are the ones threatening us with climate change, and perceiving climate change where there is none? It sure isn’t the skeptics.
      Yesterday I happened to look at the high/low for the day here in Frederick MD, and saw that the high was 85 in 1965 and the low was 23 in 1963. A sixty-two degree difference in just two years — but back then that was just weather.

  4. I keep saying it, but people don’t take me seriously: Obama is not some left wing genius, he is a nitwit, a ill-educated fool. Beyond stupid, and a toy in the hands of his inner circle.

  5. I definitely agree with this statement:

    “Many people will experience adverse mental health outcomes and social impacts from the threat of climate change, the perceived direct experience of climate change, and changes to one’s local environment,” reads a new report released by the administration

    Since taking an interest in the subject of AGW many years ago I have had one heart attack (only minor, fortunately), my blood pressure has increased daily and my head sometimes feels it going to explode with indignation upon reading the BS produced by the alarmists and my local (once beautiful) environment has been destroyed by armies of useless windmills. So, yes, the very real threat of climate change (advocates) IS very damaging.

  6. There is a musician named Mark Stein, a CNN analyst named Marc Stein, and a witty and prolific commentator on our times named Mark Steyn. Since the latter is responsible for two wonderful books on the climate, one specifically aimed at Mann made perceived global warming I assume you were referring to him.

  7. As the climate is always changing (except wherever M. Mann is), where are all the climate change created mentally ill persons.
    A new area of study for Lew, perhaps.

  8. Climate becomes more volatile at entrance and exit from interglacials.
    Real increased variability, instead of this sort of propaganda supporting anthropogenic catastrophism, is a sign of the end of the Holocene.
    =====================

  9. Folks,
    I checked his CV, but please bear in mind, I’m no fan of Michael Mann. Two points.
    1). His book is listed as “In Press.” That’s permitted as SOP in academe
    2. Despite his lawsuit concerning potential libel, he seems to be still receiving and awards which appears to make his case harder to prove (but then, I’m not a lawyer).
    George Devries Klein, PhD, PG, FGSA.

  10. I already did – but not in the way Mann thinks. Kids afraid to drink water because of the fear-mongering alarmist propaganda: From 2009: http://archive.boston.com/news/science/articles/2009/02/09/climate_change_takes_a_mental_toll/?page=full
    “Last year, an anxious, depressed 17-year-old boy was admitted to the psychiatric unit at the Royal Children’s Hospital in Melbourne. He was refusing to drink water. Worried about drought related to climate change, the young man was convinced that if he drank, millions of people would die. The Australian doctors wrote the case up as the first known instance of ‘climate change delusion.'”

  11. Frankly, it’s the alarmists that are causing the problem – and they’re doing it on purpose. Obama is one of the worst offenders. “the planet will boil over….” Really.

  12. “Climate change denial is threatening our planet”
    “Why of course the people don’t want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don’t want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or fascist dictorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peace makers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
    Same as climate change, tell the l people there is a threat to them, and then denounce those skeptical and exposing the world to an imaginary danger.
    The average person sees no personal gain, those pushing it see vast riches,

  13. ‘Climate Change’ certainly seems to drive people crazy. Mike Mann and Tom Toles are good examples of this. However ‘Climate Change’ does not seem to be adverse affect on the Earth or even the Weather.
    You cannot argue with the statement that : “Media and popular culture representations of climate change influence stress responses and mental health and well-being,”

    • Thing is, it amounts to child abuse when they put this nonsense in schools.
      If I remember correctly, using fear and terror to push a political agenda is the definition of terrorism

  14. When a “scientist” uses the word denier as a defense of their research.. are they a scientist?
    I had the misfortune of reading the comments on one of Mann’s facebook posts and it seemed every comment disagreeing was deleted as there are just reams of posts calling someone denier, denialist and so on but no comments they could have been replying to.
    Basically all the Mann page comments are “denier” blah blah. It’s like a religious group. Anyone that disagrees is somehow connected to hell apparently, in Mann’s mind.
    The guy is so creepy, he makes my skin crawl. A perfect example of a hack, a hack thrust into the spotlight.
    It is not a secret, those who want to push unpopular agendas use the most immoral and sycophantic people to front these changes, like M.E.M

  15. If I had been the subject of Mark Steyn’s book A Disgrace To The Profession I think I would go into hiding, not publish a child’s book. I hope people are reading Mark S.

  16. Surely this is an autobiography ? Thats what I thought when I first saw the cover.
    Mann denies climate history, is threatening our planet, destroying politics and driving us crazy.

  17. “Cover of my new book w/ Tom Toles …”.
    ========================================
    Mark Steyn calls Mann’s most famous discovery ‘cartoon climatology’ and lo and behold Mann obliges.

  18. During the last warming period – 1940s and 50s, scientists were telling the public about the new tracts of land opening up for harvest like in Iceland and Russia.
    Now these morons are preaching death.

  19. Crimmins, A., J. Balbus, J.L. Gamble, C.B. Beard, J.E. Bell, D. Dodgen, R.J. Eisen, N. Fann, M.D. Hawkins, S.C. Herring, L. Jantarasami, D.M. Mills, S. Saha, M.C. Sarofim, J. Trtanj, and L. Ziska, should hold their head in shame. They produce the words they are paid to.

  20. Anybody notice that the girl with the protest signs does not know how to wear a face mask? I would bet even money that she is not a nursing or med-tech major.
    The WUWT ENSO meter has moved down twice in the last few days. Compared to what it usually does, this is unprecedented. Yes, yes, I know, the ENSO meter makes watching grass grow look like a high intensity, action-packed sport.

    • Yes. I was going to make that observation, but decided to read through the comments first. Kudos to your eye for detail. To boot, I’d wager she has it upside down. Typically there is a bendable metal strip across the nose-piece that allows you to adjust for a tighter seal. I’d say “Dumb as a box of rocks”, but that would be insulting to the rocks.

  21. Obama Claims Global Warming Will Literally Drive People Crazy
    The crazies are getting ever more desperate. Evolutionists tell us that humanity developed at the equator in a much warmer climate than we know in the present industrialized world. And yet, even though we evolved in a much warmer climate, a few degrees warmer will drive us over the edge they cry.
    Well, it certainly has driven the rent-seekers over the edge. One-tree-Mike is funny though.

  22. Why should we believe Mann’s climate hypotheses when he cannot do the simple reasoning and analysis of the effects of moving to a warmer climate?
    And why not extend that lack of belief to his political and economics beliefs as well? What does “the science say”? Well, I’ve noticed that science does not talk, people talk. And to some extent data talks. Hopefully people talk after they have diligently observed, gathered data, formed a hypothesis, determined if it is falsifiable, lather, rinse, repeat, observe how predictive their hypothesis proves to be, looks for contrary evidence, publishes data and methods and invites criticism, disproves criticism in an ongoing process.

  23. I at first glance misread the subtitle to read:
    How
    Climate Change Alarmism
    Is Threatening Our Planet,
    Destroying Our Politics,
    And Driving Us Crazy
    It may be a more suitable subtitle.

  24. In the future historians will depict the argument as one that occurred between people who claimed that the climate changed and a group who believed that the climate was extraordinarily static.
    And if the history is written by the leftist academic hegemony, then Mann will be depicted as the advocate of “climate change”.
    Even though his principle contribution to climate science was the suggestion that there was no global temperature change for one thousand years up until the modern industrial era.
    In other words, he’s the one who wants to convince everyone that there has been minimal climate change.
    And that the entire Medieval Warm Period – was just weather.
    No wonder he feels like he’s going mad.

  25. Odd that Mann accuses others of climate change denial given that it was HE who set out to ‘prove’ with his hockey stick, contrary to all other evidence at the time, that the climate in the past hadn’t really changed. If that’s not living, breathing climate change denial I don’t know what is.

  26. I still wonder whether Mann is a very good computer programmer who deliberately produced a program to make a “hockey stick” out of red noise,or an incompetent who stumbled into a program that does the same thing.

    • Tom, I recall reading an article in the not too distant past, where someone had talked to a young programmer that did work for Mann. He stated that he gave Mann what Mann wanted knowing that the programing was crap.

  27. Interesting that the only ones documented to have had psche problems are those climate scientists with the climate blues caused by the “Pause”. Oh they don’t acknowledge it but its because they are resisting the signals from their brains that warming isn’t happening as designed (the real classical d*nile studied by Sigmund and Anna Freud).

  28. You see what Mike has done. He has distracted you from his ‘science’ which is under attack from all sides and made it about denialism.
    Watch the pea.

  29. Good news –
    Only Obama administration released recipients of new report claiming global warming
    will harm the mentally ill.
    ____________________
    Or what to do with
    ‘The Obama administration released a new report claiming global warming will make mental health issues worse — the report notes even “perceived” threats from global warming will harm the mentally ill.’

  30. Doomsday climate books are a better opportunity for pitchmen than the doomsday recession/depression investment books. Climate doom is less cyclical than economic warnings. The market value fades on depression warnings when the recovery is more obvious to the book buyers. There is not as much on the obvious side in climate, especially with data manipulation.

  31. “I’d say when it comes to being driven crazy, it’s too late for Dr. Mann, because Barack O’Bama.”
    Is that the Irish Barry O’Bama? or the Kenyan Barack Obama?

  32. e.g. Germany, Duisburg Process, today.
    1 expert == Sachverständiger did’nt make his job.
    So
    The whole incident never gets to trial.
    some kind’a mass murder. Who cares – not justice.

    • Double heh!! For awhile I thought my experience of having my best stuff censored was once again re-visited. I’m not being ironic, here; the moderators of the sites in which I have the most respect have been remarkably wise.
      But thanks, anyway for allowing it. I’m trying to be ambiguous enough to make everybody happy. Is it working?
      ============
      [Reply: You’re being as cryptic as Johann Wundersamer. –mod]

  33. Can’t help wondering how all his politicking and writing of political tomes fits into his schedule? Is he not a paid full time employee of a University? How much time can he actually be spending on his University duties?

  34. It looks like the title of the book and the cover art are mocking the global warming alarmists. These guys really aren’t that intelligent.

  35. Sadly enough the claim of Obama, from the position I myself stand, it is apretty good claim with a very likely outcome in principle and in the generals of the claim, actually when considering that the “global warming” means climate change as per the actual given conditions.
    Right or wrong that is another matter, but for the sake of the truth I have claimed and supported the same, years ago, as far going back as a decade ago…….so if somehow there is an increase of violence and madness observed, or claimed due to the climate change at an actual increase of 400 ppm as per now, and somehow that happens to be in correlation and effected by the change……then imagine the degree of it when at some point of 480 ppm …………as far as I can tell this is not a joke…..that does not mean that it is true or correct,,,,,but ignoring it has a very high price tag……
    I have had a similar argument at the Guardian years ago, and treated in more detail and “depth”.
    Again it does not mean that it is true or of any real substance, as the matter very complicated at that angle of approach…….simply trying a give my own take in this,,,,,,,in principle (only) I would completely agree with Obama in this one…..sorry if that is not so reasonably explained at this point…:), but again that is my take and understanding in the regard of this particular issue….
    Hopefully my comment will have a contribution by showing that still there is possible to take and support arguments not in a very fashionable away, even here..:)
    cheers

    • Except there hasn’t been such an increase of violence and madness in climate as CO2 has risen from 280 to 400.
      The argument has long been which has more effect upon climate, the increased amount of energy in a warming world, or a decreased polar/equatorial temperature gradient?
      It amuses me that these are countervailing tendencies, but the latter has a much larger percentage decrease than the former a percentage increase.
      One of these is a lot more intuitively obvious than the other, and much more easy of mass belief. The other, however, has much the stronger impact, however difficult to understand.
      Bottom line: Higher CO2, lesser severity of storms. We may already be seeing that effect, though I would be the first to admit that that would a very premature conclusion.
      ===============

    • whiten, what a delusional comment, with zero evidence given for even the correlation you imagine.

      • David A
        April 5, 2016 at 9:54 pm
        whiten, what a delusional comment, with zero evidence given for even the correlation you imagine.
        —————
        Hello David A.
        Your point made is understood, ok.
        But, just for a further explaining, my own point in my comment……….I am not claiming that I do agree in principle (only) with what Mr Obama says by relying in the grounds that there is data or research that to a degree show the mentioned correlation…..simply saying I do agree for other reasons than that, which are not explained in my post….and as for the sake of the truth the correlation was mentioned only in the prospect of that if one day there is a conclusion through the future research that such a correlation seems to be there, will it be considered seriously…
        And also in my comment I think I was clear enough that I was not implying in anyway that in any point there was a suggestion or an implying of a certainty of such as this been true or not.
        I just was trying to explain my own stand in this one, but clearly showing that there was no any real argument or evidence to imply the validity or the accuracy………I think anyone is entitle of that much…….as to be at least honest enough with his taken position…….
        My main point is that even regardless of my position (which could be wrong in this one), still is not feasible to totally ignore or not seriously considered when it comes to environmental changes that seem to be sharp or drastic enough, according to our understanding or our knowledge.
        The ppm of the CO2 variation and it’s increases stands as a sharp one when the length of time in consideration,,,,,,when in the same time the prospect of it following it’s present path at least for the immediate future seems plausible enough.
        In the end it may be exactly as some here claim. that the increase of ppm(s) of CO2 in overall, as per the way it stands, is all or almost beneficial to us ( with nothing to worry about) and the rest of the biosphere,,,,,, but failing to take in consideration all that could and must be taken in account, as far as I can tell, usually means a probability of a disaster………..waiting to surprise us…….
        anyway ….whatever…. in the main conclusion about my comment you are right, if I was claiming that in principle Obama is or could or must be right in this one because of a given correlation as per the case in point, then I would really had to consider my “delusion” about all this…:). Is not in my understanding or the info I rely on that an evidence of a such a correlation or a research showing such as a correlation it does exist……..
        🙂
        cheers

      • Whiten,
        Here’s what you seem to misunderstand. Correlation is not causation. There can be an absolutely airtight, perfect correlation between two things occurring, without those two things causing or affection one another in reality. It is merely a statistical tool. It is not a diagnostic one.
        “The ppm of the CO2 variation and it’s increases stands as a sharp one when the length of time in consideration,,,,,,when in the same time the prospect of it following it’s present path at least for the immediate future seems plausible enough.”
        Not if you actually read the research that’s been available since the early 2000’s on how much and how fast CO2, and or temperatures, have varied in the past. Start with this report- Abrupt Climate Change-Inevitable Surprises- 2002- (read it free online)
        http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10136/abrupt-climate-change-inevitable-surprises
        Or this-https://www.wunderground.com/resources/climate/abruptclimate.asp
        Here are a few quotes for you- (bold mine)
        “Ocean and lake sediment data from places such as California, Venezuela, and Antarctica have confirmed that these sudden climate changes affected not just Greenland, but the entire world. During the past 110,000 years, there have been at least 20 such abrupt climate changes. Only one period of stable climate has existed during the past 110,000 years–the 11,000 years of modern climate (the “Holocene” era). “Normal” climate for Earth is the climate of sudden extreme jumps–like a light switch flicking on and off.
        “As seen in Figure 1, the ice core record showed frequent sudden warmings and coolings of 15°F (8°C) or more. Many of these changes happened in less than 10 years. In one case 11,600 years ago, when Earth emerged from the final phase of the most recent ice age (an event called the Younger Dryas), the Greenland ice core data showed that a 15°F (8°C) warming occurred in less than a decade, accompanied by a doubling of snow accumulation in 3 years. Most of this doubling occurred in a single year.”

  36. Mann has in his credentials that he was a contributor to the IPCC report that received a Nobel Prize.
    Anyone know when was the last time the IPCC used his Hockey Stick?
    Who filed in support of him in his lawsuit?
    He seems to be like that has-been at the bar that loves to tell anyone who will listen about the big play he made in “the game” years ago. They’ll buy him a drink. They’ll use his name to sell something. But no one will let him get near the ball again.

  37. I note this morning that Cruz beat Trump in Wisconsin. Cruz for President? Collapse of the warmists?

Comments are closed.