Quote of the Week- Mann parodies science: ‘we don’t need no stinking data’

With apologies to Alfonso Bedoya in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre.

no-stinkin-data

Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. once quipped:

If Michael Mann did not exist, the skeptics would have to invent him.

Such is the case today where Mann becomes a climate skeptic’s best friend. In a recent presentation to a bunch of political operatives, the Mann put his pseudo-scientific foot in his mouth. From the Washington Times:


Leading climate doomsayer Michael Mann recently downplayed the importance of climate change science, telling Democrats that data and models “increasingly are unnecessary” because the impact is obvious.

“Fundamentally, I’m a climate scientist and have spent much of my career with my head buried in climate-model output and observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change,”

Mr. Mann told the Democratic Platform Drafting Committee at a hearing.

“What is disconcerting to me and so many of my colleagues is that these tools that we’ve spent years developing increasingly are unnecessary because we can see climate change, the impacts of climate change, now, playing out in real time, on our television screens, in the 24-hour news cycle,” he said.

Mr. Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University, spoke before the committee June 17 in Phoenix.

His comment drew hoots from climate skeptics, including the website Greenie Watch, which posted his comment under the headline, “‘Scientist’ Michael Mann says there is no need for statistics: You can just SEE global warming.”

More here: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/27/michael-mann-climate-scientist-data-increasingly-u/


Right.

That quote is up there with former Senator Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.) who famously said:

Global warming creates volatility. I feel it when I’m flying.

Yep, who needs data when you can just see and feel global warming happening? According to Michael Mann, just tune in your favorite news channel! Oh, wait.

But there’s good news! Since we don’t need to [rely] on data anymore, and rely just on our senses, we can shut down all those climate programs that take in millions of federal and state tax dollars now. Thanks Mike!

Added:

From draft of Democratic platform: (h/t to Juan Slayton and Mumbles McGuirck)

Another joint proposal calling on the Department of Justice to investigate alleged corporate fraud on the part of fossil fuel companies who have reportedly misled shareholders and the public on the scientific reality of climate change was also adopted by unanimous consent.

https://demconvention.com/news/democratic-platform-drafting-meeting-concludes/

Note: about 10 minutes after publication some HTML formatting errors and a missing link to Pielke Jr were fixed – Anthony

Advertisements

204 thoughts on “Quote of the Week- Mann parodies science: ‘we don’t need no stinking data’

      • No, it’s a ‘pass the buck’ sort of relay. (Not that I expect Mann has ever passed on a Buck).

      • Climate is a run away feedback loop, as proven by the fact that climate tipped over and Earth is currently inhabitable.

      • Santa Baby-
        Fact-“a thing that is indisputably the case.synonyms: reality, actuality, certainty; truth,”
        Data-“facts and statistics collected together for reference or analysis.synonyms: facts, figures, statistics, details, particulars, specifics; information, intelligence, material, input; informal info
        (philosophy) “things known or assumed as facts, making the basis of reasoning or calculation.”

        And there you have it. When philosophy started sleeping with science, science became infected with the highly contagious ITD (intellectually transmitted disease) called SAIDS-Stupid Assumptions and Insinuations Destructive to Science. This caused infected scientists to start calling things”‘facts” when they really were not actually facts, and using illogical reasoning to form their calculations. Once a scientific methodology has been infected by SAIDS, it can be passed along from host to unsuspecting host, undetected, for decades. Unless a scientific methodology is examined specifically FOR this nasty little virus, and the entire lineage of scientific papers it spawned are cleansed of it, it will continue to spread until it reaches critical mass. :)

        It’s not a scientific fact, but I suspect that Michael Mann is one of just a few people that could be patient zero…..

      • Relay refers to the term to describe the handing off of money from bureaucrats from person to person.

      • It’s not that the general public isn’t bright enough, it’s that they have been bought of with Other People’s Money (OPM).

      • No, the sharp ones can be negotiated with. I like the sharp liberals.

        Sharp Liberal + Sharp Conservative = balanced policy
        Sharp X + No Opposed = policy that excludes alternative viewpoints and might work, but often leads to long term problems due to narrowness of any one point of view.
        Dumb X + No Opposed = unbalanced policy that excludes alternative viewpoints and doesn’t work in the short or long erm
        Dumb X + Y opposed = accusations of evil/stupidity and no reasonable progress

    • Hey, it all jumped the shark when a number of them came right out and ADMITTED that “Climate Change” no longer has anything to do with either science or the environment, but is a way of moving money around the world. The ice caps haven’t melted, the Midwest is not a desert, the real deserts are greening some places and the crops are growing better than ever. No one is rowing a boat up to their Manhattan 3rd-story window! (Heads Up to Elites: The damn proles can use their eyes and ears! Bummer.)

    • When the hole gets too deep…liberals typically do one of three things:
      1) declare that they were forced into a hole dug by someone else,
      2) insist that they love the hole and that everyone else deserves and wants a hole just like theirs
      3) say that the only reason you are pointing out the depth of their hole is because you are a bigot, racist, or conservative….likely a combination of all three.

      :)))))

      • 4) Issue a badly worded “non-negotiable” manifesto with multiple grammatical errors and “creative” spelling with the following general format:

        We DEMAND that everyone else admit that they are the root, cause, and vessel of any and all evil that has ever occurred.

        We DEMAND that everyone else admit that it is their fault that we are not as successful as we would like, do not have everything we want at the exact moment we want it, and are not getting everything for free.

        We DEMAND that $[fill in obscene amount of money] be spent on building a luxury safe space that is segregated from everyone who does not look exactly like us AND think exactly like us. A dungeon should be constructed nearby for our ALLIES to use for self-flaggulation. These buildings must be given nonsensical titles with randomly capitalized letters, at least one non-alpha character, and at least one number replacing a letter, preferably a letter that the number does not really resemble.

        We DEMAND that every group in existence hire people who look and think exactly like us so that said groups can be constantly verbally attacked. Physical assault is also acceptable. If the hired person is not vitriolic enough, he/she/preferred made up pronoun must be fired immediately, figuratively and literally if possible. If allowed to live, the person must be constantly attacked with the same slurs and treatment we claim to have experienced (even though only one of us did (sort of)). These attacks will not be considered offensive as the person deserves it.

        We DEMAND that all buildings and structures that may at some point be considered offensive be torn down immediately. We also DEMAND that all groups and people who we do not like be figuratively and literally destroyed if possible…….

        (Sorry, I just could write more badly than this. Too much decent education.)

        5) Loudly claim on all social media platforms that the hole is everyone else’s fault and that they have been severely traumatized. Demand apologies from everyone who does not look and think exactly like you. Tell them that those apologies are not enough.

        6) Go to safe space and cry. Yell at anyone who comes within sight or hearing.

      • Rule 1: Liberals are always right.
        Rule 2: When a liberal is wrong, shun any backward-thinkers who point it out, then see Rule 1.

  1. And the Democratic Platform Drafting Committee then voted in a plank calling for “the Department of Justice to investigate alleged corporate fraud on the part of fossil fuel companies who have reportedly misled shareholders and the public on the scientific reality of climate change…”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/27/dem-party-platform-calls-for-prosecuting-global-warming-skeptics/#ixzz4CuBXlnf5
    So they believed Mikey, at least enough to grant them cover for their intimidation tactics.

    • The present Democratic Party has a radical and active element in it! Similar situation to the 1968 Chicago Democratic Party Convention?

    • I would think the cheat is perpetrated far more by claiming that ‘renewables’ were a good investment because the government was going to force everyone to buy and use them or their output. Talk about investor fraud.

    • So it is not a waste of time to harass companies over non-existant responsibilities, nonexistent conclusions, not lying because there was nothing to lie about, and exercising that lovely right to freedom of belief/expression, but it IS a waste of time to try to find out how the first US ambassador to be killed in 33 years was put in the position in the first place, why 4 Americans were left to die, why a bunch of diplomats were put in serious danger, why the administration lied about everything to do with the attacks… It IS a waste of time to investigate a former cabinet member for corrupt foreign dealings (as secretary of state!), criminal negligence with regards to oaths taken when sworn into office, and other crimes. It IS a waste of time to investigate whether or not the IRS deliberately targeted certain groups based on their political ideology, which was often assumed. It IS a waste of time to investigate whether or not certain “scientists” have lied under oath about supposed conclusions and “data” that has potentially been manipulated or falsified, all while taking money from the federal government…

      What do you want to bet that investigating the dishonesty at the EPA and USGS will also be labeled a waste of time by these same people calling for the harassment of private companies? I realize that much of the current US administration abhors religion (well, the Judeo-Christian ones) or went to church for 20+ years and did not hear a thing, so I will provide some very good Biblical advice, paraphrased:

      Physician, heal thyself!!! Remove the beam from thine eye before plucking the mote from thy brother’s eye!!! In other words, clean your own house before you go after others for their supposed sins.

    • “A splice here and a splice there and isn’t it nice, data no more.”

      You know who else does splicing?

      Dr Frankenstein.

      But most people don’t find the result pretty.

  2. Mann is absolutely right. You can see the climate change, right before your very eyes.
    Here where I am (Boston), the climate has warmed very dramatically in the past 5 months. Average monthly temperatures have gone up, up, up. I am sure that Dr. Mann (in PA) which is somewhat south of my location, has observed exactly the same phenomena.

  3. Relying on well doctored data that is still not behaving…….?
    Simple: don’t need that stuff no more. Climate change/global warming solved. No wonder the science is settled.

  4. “Fundamentally, I’m a climate scientist and have spent much of my career with my head buried in climate-model output and observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change,”

    Nobody got time for that – Barak Obama

    • “trying to tease out the signal” A clear signal would just need to be pointed to. Now he can detect it by simply watching the weather channel. meh; I’ve got to remember these statements aren’t trying to convert the skeptical but to keep cheer leading the home team. yeah team…..

      • I can’t wait until it’s a criminal offense to mislead the American public by making statements that are not in fact true! Let’s start compiling a list of the cracked heads We The People want to take to court with our first Class Action RICO suit! The People against Mann, Cook, Nucitelli, Schmidt, Hansen….

      • He is literally teasing them. The ‘signal’ isn’t there – they all know that because they would produce it if it was. Instead they point to weather events hoping no one listening is old enough to remember that last time it happened.

      • I believe that was a verbal typo. He really meant “torture the data to create the signal”.

    • To me that’s the money phrase – “trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change”.
      So much for unbiased science. He just admitted (without realizing it) that he started with the answer he was looking for.
      Does the “Earth System Science Center at Penn State University” focus on all earth sciences or just those that are anthropomorphic?
      And by the way, how does current observation of “extreme weather” (whether or not it is anything beyond normal” give a clue as to human causation?

    • If the signal is so clear that you can see it, then why does he need dicey statistical techniques to “tease out the signal of human-caused climate change”?

      • My new book on Climateers: “50 shades of shady” subtitled, “Torturing data is OK if it never uses the safe word”.

  5. Does he even realize he has contradicted himself?

    He spent years developing tools to find a human signal in climate change. (This statement assumes the existence of climate change.) But now he doesn’t need those tools because he can see the evidence of climate change on his TV screen. Huh?

    Maybe he meant he can see evidence of human induced climate change on his TV screen. If that is the case, then he has some serious explaining to show the rest of us how this melting ice is due to nature, but that melting ice is due to humans.

    • Hey, people can convince themselves of ANYTHING. I’ve got a magazine sitting on my desk full of ads for people selling (I am not making this up!) “Chakra Balancing” and “Aromatherapy” for HORSES. And I’m sure the clients they charge hundreds of dollars for this medicine show believe it just as fervently as Mann’s devout followers believe the Sky is Falling. Remember the 19th century, when “spiritism” was a “thing” and everyone was contacting their dead relatives? People believed THAT, too!

      • “ads for people selling (I am not making this up!) “Chakra Balancing” and “Aromatherapy” for HORSES (…) Remember the 19th century, when “spiritism” was a “thing” and everyone was contacting their dead relatives?”

        But can they contact dead horses?

  6. That’s a stretch, even for this site. Most people would read this as saying that since the warming models are already playing out in real-time and real data, models of the future are less necessary or relevant. Which is self-evidently true.

    • Nothing out of the ordinary is happening now. And the models’ predictions have been shown false. Thus, ever new, scary predictions are needed.

    • Then why keep Mikey employed? Or at least why continue to fund modeling studies? If they are increasingly irrelevant, why keep running them? We can just watch the nightly news and see we are all doomed and save our money to buy bigger air conditioners.

    • Since the models are what they are, they should be able to predict the past with equal validity. I have yet seen one that predicts the Medieval Optimum that Mann says never happened, but which any minor student of history will assure you did.

      Your statement is what is generally known as a “special pleading” in the field of argument and logic.

    • No, what he said is that models that have been developed are not useful but it doesn’t matter since we all can see it with our eyes. I notice you say “warming models” not climate models. Perhaps a slip of the tongue that exposes your predetermined position?

    • “Most people” would? By “people”, you must mean True Believers such as yourself. And sorry to burst your bubble, but those warming models you adore are pure crud, and the only thing they are “playing out” is how pathetically bad they truly are.

      • Those “most people” are the same ones who “didn’t know ANYONE who voted for Richard Nixon” the year he won the Presidency by a landslide. Upper-middle “chattering class” echo-chamber who’ve lived their entire lives without ever having dirt under their fingernails . . .

    • If the evening news said there was a hurricane in Florida, you need scientists to collect data. If the evening news says there was a hurricane in Florida caused by climate change, science is no longer needed because you see it on the news.

      Mann is saying exactly what he means. The political operatives in the audience decide our reality by propagandizing the masses to believe whatever the operatives declare to be true. Scientists are truly irrelevant in that context, for or against.

      Until people can reliably discern a change of “average” temperature of a fraction of a degree over decades, most of which occurs at night while they are sleeping, to suggest we just FEEL it is preposterous.

      • What Mann is revealing is that he is unaware of conflating weather and climate. Perhaps some climate knowledge would have helped in development of the models. Probably one of the reasons they have no predictive value.

    • The problem is that the warming models *aren’t* playing out and that what he sees on TV is false attribution to climate change of things that are within normal variation.

    • The models claimed that there should have been several degrees of warming by now.
      Where is it?
      The models claimed that the world would be stormier, where are the storms?

    • Sir Dipstick, all of the observational data out of your window has falsified the CAGW hypothesis. Extreme weather events are way down, temperatures within the same range it has always been based on natural cycles, polar bears are thriving, and with the CO2 increase to 400ppm the temperature has not increased as predicted by the sycophants You need a couple quarts of oil as you are a bit short.

    • But the models have been shown to be false, and everything you see on TV is either weather or very biased. His statement is just a variation on “the science is settled”.

    • Harry,

      Most people will never read what Mickey Mouse said. Most people have zero idea who he even is. Most people can look out their windows, or check their local records, and verify that the climate hasn’t changed in any real way in the past 50 years. Most people know that weather forecasts aren’t accurate more than 3 days in advance, so models of anything more futuristic are guesswork.

      Mickey is becoming less necessary or relevant. That is self evidently true.

      • The temperature of Waterloo hasn’t gone up in 100 years. Last year, a new record low of -34.5 C was set in the city. I’d say something is ‘playing out’ but it sure as heck isn’t a CO2-enhanced climate model.

  7. Nasty weather is natural. It is happening someplace all the time and always has. Vivid graphics on TV make it look ominous and omnipresent. Some mistakenly blame humans for it.

    • Exactly, and nasty weather happens at different places over time – each happening will appear unprecedented at that place and give the impression that weather is getting worse.

      • It’s a big world. The odds are that something nasty is going on somewhere at any given time.
        In the past we would only find about nasty weather that hit far from us weeks or months later, and the report would just be a few column inches far from the front page.
        Today, no matter where the nasty weather is occurring it’s covered live on all the networks.

      • There are so many places to try a new 100 record every year. There are so many variables to make the record.

      • It is the weather version of how it is a recession when your neighbor loses his job, and a depression when you lose yours.

        Oh dear. I used the grammatically correct possessive for a singular non sex-specified human entity. How rude of me.

        Sidenote: Question for readers of WUWT from countries with non-English native languages: are people in your countries having the vapors over the genders of nouns? Are there movements afoot to change all nouns to “neutral” forms rather than masculine or feminine forms?

        I am not sure which would be worse, the insanity being confined to the US and Canada or the insanity spreading around the world.

      • Reply to AllyKat:

        Nowadays, politically correct Swedes are inserting the newly invented gender-neutral pronoun “hen” wherever possible instead of “han”(he) or “hon”(she). In these times of gender confusion, “hen” is supposed to mean “he or she, neither he nor she, he or she or both, not sure about whether he or she etc etc.”.

      • I have no idea how you could even do that in Spanish. Removing the ‘o’ or ‘a’ and replacing it with something else would, in most instances make it an entirely different word.

    • Sin! SIN!! Fire and Brimstone! We musta done it, we’re so naughty and guilty Gaia will smite us!

  8. Notice that Mann said “trying to tease out” . Admittedly unsuccessful in his efforts. Perhaps why he resorted to his nature trick.

    • Tom,
      I caught that too! Why would anyone have to spend 20 years developing TOOLS to “tease out” a signal that was so blatantly obvious that the science concerning it was already settled by consensus? If ALL of the warming in Mickey Mann’s entire life has been human induced….what was there to tease out?

      It’s like listening to Lou Costello!

      • Perhaps Mann simply watched a re-airing of Day After Tomorrow, thought it was a documentary, and made his claims of observable climate change on that basis.

    • I get the news I need on the weather report
      Oh, I can gather all the news I need on the weather report
      Hey, I’ve got nothing to do today but smile

  9. So, good ole Mikey Mann says this:” we can see climate change, the impacts of climate change, now, playing out in real time …”
    LOL, Mikey doesn’t live in Canada. Nope, he doesn’t because I have been waiting for more than 50 years to see climate change come to southern Ontario. and it hasn’t come yet. What IS the delay, Mr. Mann?

    • You have to Believe in order to see it. It’s just like ghosts. You aren’t going to see them if you don’t believe in them.

  10. “Fundamentally, I’m a climate scientist and have spent much of my career with my head buried in climate-model output and observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change,”

    Which is exactly the method inductivists use – unwittingly revealed by an inductivist.

  11. Mann talks like a naive adolescent. It is astonishing and embarrassing that such remarks come from someone considered to be a leading scientist.

    • I think Penn State is hurting its reputation by continuing to hire him. He brings in money, money is good, so Mike stays. I think it would be fun to send this particular statement to his Dean suggesting that it shows he is out of ideas and will shortly be unable to continue bring in the bucks. The Dean should be at least a little embarrassed.

      • It is pretty sad that they were willing to throw Paterno under the bus for someone else’s sins, but they continue to support this joker.

      • The head coach is responsible for everyone on his staff. That’s always the way it’s been.
        There was evidence that Paterno had not been as diligent as he should have been.

  12. He was preaching to the political pseudoscience choir for sure. They should wear white hoods when doing that.

    • Maybe he thinks that all the winter sports playoffs and championships sliding well into spring is a sign of warming. To be fair, these season extensions are also all about money, so that conflation probably would make sense to him.

  13. Yes, I 100% agree with Dr. Mann and therefore all government funding of climate science should be immediately terminated, starting with Penn State University. Cheers, Mark

  14. Global warming creates volatility. I feel it when I’m flying.

    Occam’s razor favours the theory that it’s just Debbie’s hemorrhoids getting worse as she ages.

  15. I can’t wait to turn on the tv now so I can see climate change. This will be a game-changer for sure.

    • I’ve had mine on all day and haven’t seen any climate change at all! Is it a special subscription I have to add to my cable package?

  16. “Fundamentally, I’m a climate scientist and have spent much of my career with my head buried in climate-model output and observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change …”.
    ==========================================
    Confirmation bias on stilts.
    Barbara Boxer just has to look out her window: “In California, we can just look out the window to see climate change’s impacts …”.

    “I know that most men—not only those considered clever, but even those who are very clever, and capable of understanding most difficult scientific, mathematical, or philosophic problems—can very seldom discern even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as to oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions they have formed, perhaps with much difficulty—conclusions of which they are proud, which they have taught to others, and on which they have built their lives …” (Tolstoy).

  17. I’ve just got up and I can tell you it feels bloody chilly which seems odd since I live in the tropics.

  18. I’m sure that Mark Steyn has better things to do than respond to this absurdity, but I sure wish he would.

    I’m sure it would be priceless.

    • Oh trust me…He misses nothing Mann says. He can add this latest statement to the case to strengthen his case regarding Mann’s credibility and intelligence. Lol

  19. So the Democratic platform adopts Oreskes Merchants of Doubt nonsense and calls for DoJ investigations. Neither democratic nor constitutional. And Mann participates. Steyn needs to take him down with more than the book.

    • “So the Democratic platform adopts Oreskes Merchants of Doubt nonsense”

      Do the dems want to change neutral pH or the weight of beryllium?

  20. Yes indeed, climate change should definitely be obvious Dr. Boyy. The two most extreme periods of climate change are glacial terminations and glacial inceptions. But the most interesting climate question at this moment in the Holocene is just how would one be able to tell “ours” from the normal, natural, regularly-scheduled “climatic madhouse” that seems to always attend the ends of the post-MPT extreme interglacials?

    By our best estimate, the Holocene is presently (as of 2016) 11,719 years old (+/-99 years)(based on the end of the Younger-Dryas Cold Interval). It is hard to imagine a more ominous number, climatewise. At the end of the last interglacial, the Eemian (or MIS-5e), there were two strong, closely-spaced, thermal pulses, the second one was the stronger. Immediately after climate deteriorated rapidly into the Wisconsin Ice Age. Depending upon whom you wish to believe, sea level (the ultimate measure of climate change) jumped somewhere between +6 to +52 meters above present.

    So the question only a Boyy could not begin to fathom would be how to tell which +0.6 meter IPCC rise by 2099 (AR4 worst case scenario) or +0.8 meter rise by 2100 (AR5) out of a possible +6 – +52 meter rise that might happen anyway is “ours”?

    But for climate Boyy’s, it most definitely is far, far worse than they think. One of the things I most enjoy about litigation support is flipping the opposition’s arguments on their head. Ridiculously simple in the case of AGW.

    What if all you climate Boyys are right about CO2? Ever stop to think that all the way through (before getting spanked in court)? There are basically 2 possibilities here: (1) Either the Holocene was going to just run blithely on and on ad infinitum, had it not been disturbed by “us”, meaning AGW, or (2) the only reason we are still enjoying Holocene interglacial warmth is BECAUSE of AGW.

    But Boyys will be Boyys, afterall. And then there is APS (Arrested Puberty Syndrome). One of the more telling signs of maturity that can define the transition from boy to man is the ability to graciously take criticism. Especially well-reasoned criticism. But even more so if one takes your ideas and run with them, leaving you nowhere to go at the late-Holocene. I submit for consideration that this sort of thing defines the transition from Boyy to Mann.

    I say go ahead and deplete the late-Holocene atmosphere of “climate security blanket (GHGs et al). Modern hominids are nowhere near as well climate adapted as late-Eemian hominids were. And then there came the Mt. Toba eruption ~70kya, smack-dab in the middle of the last ice age. Genetically, something like ~10k hominids made it out of that volcanic imposed climate change alive. Your basic average “population bottleneck”. By being able to come to the exact wrong conclusion regarding what to do about AGW, how well do you suppose your genome will do?

    On the other hand, there is a lot that can said regarding such population bottlenecks. We do tend to get a better hominid out of them. In simple, this is a case of maturation. I like to think of it as the difference between “cause and effect” and “cause and defect”. If the cause is AGW, and so far as has best been prognosticated, our worst case effect, raising ambient sea level by +0.6 – +0.8 meters above present, would be completely undetectable should sea level do another whoop-di-do like the lowest estimate of +6 meters at the end-Eemian. Which is the first of the “defects”. Left unchecked, AGW’s worst case most likely would be to span the next 44kyrs until insolation begins to pick-up again.

    But the shining gem here is best described as sadistics. Employing matheMANNics and AlGoreithms we might just get the really scary tipping point. You know the one of the opposite sign than the one expected? If the Boyys are right about CO2, we might end-up removing the only so-far postulated speedbump to glacial inception. It doesn’t even require a fully-matured noodle to glom onto the probability that those that do not graduate puberty will have an especially challenging time preserving their genome for the next ~90kyrs of ice age. Plus or minus another Mt. Toba……..

    The possibility therefore exists that the better, possibly more mature thing to do here is “Let the Wookie(s) win!” Think of it this way; Mannkind or Mankind? (no offense ladies, this is seManntics)

    I say again, a more decisive intelligence test than climate change has yet to be invented.

    • I like your “turn-tables-argument. Always fun to watch people trying to digest their own nonsense. If we are really saving the world from the next ice age, I will be delighted. Unfortunately, the recent hiatus puts the baloney to the whole idea of CO2 mediated warming and/ or the laughable notion of no negative feedback.

  21. If Steyn v Mann ever got to court it could be dwarf Climategate’s impact. The other two defendants should push for trial, like Steyn, rather than dismissal.

  22. Fundamentally, I’m a climate scientist and have spent much of my career with my head buried in climate-model output and observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change,

    What “Dr.” Mann is saying is that he and his “team” have spent a career trying to tease out the signal of human-caused global warming and have failed. Failed miserably.

    Most would say that with this failure one should look at the hypothesis but Mann says to just ignore the data. Go with “feelings”. Go with your gut.

    Well, my gut was educated in math and science before it was tainted by the politics of the CO2 delusion. I could tell “Dr.” Mann that simply CO2 don’t do what you think it does. Proof? How about 20 years of no warming while CO2 skyrocketed. Doesn’t that say anything to these clowns?

  23. Was reading two different things and then the above article tickled something…

    ‘Climate Scientist’
    Phil Jones’s response to Warwick Hughes’s request for Jones’s raw climate data:
    “Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on the data. We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it.”

    ‘Climate Scientist’
    Michael Mann
    “Leading climate doomsayer Michael Mann recently downplayed the importance of climate change science, telling Democrats that data and models “increasingly are unnecessary” because the impact is obvious”

    Real Scientist(s?)
    Physicist Lee Smolin and philosopher Roberto Unger at the TIME IN COSMOLOGY conference (June ’16)
    They pull no punches in their sense that the lack of empirical data has led the field (Physics) astray. As they put it:
    “Science is corrupted when it abandons the discipline of empirical validation or dis-confirmation. It is also weakened when it mistakes its assumptions for facts and its ready-made philosophy for the way things are.”

    Someone needs to cutback on the navel gazing…

    • Lee Smolin lives in Waterloo – the place of common sense, real science and engineering. Oh yeah, and the strings theory group. Takes all kinds…

  24. It must really bother him that he’s wasted his entire career on a failed, pointless effort. Oh well, at least he got that “Nobel Prize” out of it.

    • A peace prize was what Gore and he IPCC got. People need to be reminded of that and how hollow tat prize is after 2009’s winner.

  25. Although this pokes fun at Mann and his cohort, it’s serious business. Most of the democratic party fully buys into this; that global warming manifests itself before our very eyes. No amount of data will otherwise convince these people. The American Chemical Society and the other national scientific bodies agree with the proposition. I believe that the battle has been lost.

  26. “What is disconcerting to me and so many of my colleagues is that these tools that we’ve spent years developing increasingly are unnecessary because we can see climate change, the impacts of climate change, now, playing out in real time, on our television screens, in the 24-hour news cycle,” he said.

    Is he an editor for The Storm Channel?
    Probably not. If he was then he’d know that they focus on any storm anywhere in there forecast. If any present storm system isn’t noteworthy, then they either talk about how bad a storm could be or about how bad a past storm was.
    If there’s such a thing out there, perhaps he should start watching Real Reality TV?
    (Or just remember what he saw out the window when he was a kid?)

    • People are so used to hearing that “climate change” is a “bad” thing that I would guess that they think that the worlds weather should be stable within a few degrees without severe storms and that it’s all CO2’s fault that it ain’t so.

    • Isn’t it amazing how much calmer “Climate Change” was before everybody’s cell phone could record video?

  27. “Fundamentally, I’m a climate scientist and have spent much of my career with my head buried in climate-model output and observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change”

    Teased it out? The data’s gone through the equivalent of a torture chamber.

  28. Fundamentally, I’m a climate scientist and have spent much of my career with my head buried in

    Nevermind, he makes it too easy ;)

  29. The full quote from the movie is even more applicable to climate science. The actual quote goes, “We don’t need to show you no stinking badges,” which is even closer to what happened with the data.

  30. Anyway, Pseudo-Scientific American has “discovered” the climate change signal emerging from the weather, and their “ability as a scientific community to adequately (and convincingly) disentangle the human-caused factors from the underlying natural variability continues to improve”
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-signal-emerges-from-the-weather/

    Amazing. Their “ability” to look at weather and see not only climate, but manmade climate. Truly a remarkable achievement.

  31. Incredible – these people never give up. I will reluctantly be voting for Trump based on this issue only.

  32. Do ‘skeptics’ have difficulty understanding simple English sentences? Or are they just pretending to?

    [or it could be the problem is you -mod]

    • Magma,

      You seem to see a different message than we do. Tell us which words you are struggling with, and we’ll provide standard English definitions of them for you. Or are you just pretending that what he said is not what he meant?

    • As Willis would say, show the simple English sentences. Then show how people misunderstood those sentences. Your statement has no substance, it is simply insulting.

    • @ Magma

      You asked, “Do ‘skeptics’ have difficulty understanding simple English sentences? Or are they just pretending to?

      I am but a simple man. I have spent a lifetime teaching science and mathematics at various levels. I have never had the opertunity to teach creative writing. (which is needed to be an alarmists apparently)

      What I saw in Mann’s statements was “… have spent much of my career with my head buried in climate-model output and observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change.” As you know, for 20 years there has been no rise in “global warming” even as the CO2 levels skyrocketed. So, for 20 years Mr. Mann has been unable to defend the CO2 hypothesis (delusion) and, indeed, it has been falsified by objective measurements. (and this even includes the US government’s cheating on the time series as much as they can get away with)

      So, I think I am reading him correctly. He is saying that we should give up on the real science and go to just looking at all the storms. Heck, it flooded in West Virginia just this week. Being from the area, I know that it floods in the Appalachian mountains all the time. That is where the term “gully washer” comes from. But we can look at the flood and say “darn! it must be an act of God!” — or we can say “darn, it must be a trace gas!” Both superstitions are equally false. (well, I am not as sure about God. Hard to prove he/she/it did not do it)

    • On the other hand, The Donald’s threat to tear up all of our trade agreements is likely to be more damaging to the economy than anything Hillary is likely to do.

  33. The CAGW alarmists know the gig is up. CAGW’s global warming mean projections are already off by 2+ standard deviations for 20 years, which is sufficient disparity and duration to officially disconfirm the CAGW hypothesis…… Providing, of course, empirical data and the Scientific Method are still used in climatology….

    Because we’re quickly entering a strong La Niña cycle, the “hiatus” will rear its ugly head again from around mid-2018, extending the flat global warming trend to 22+ years. Moreover, both the AMO and PDO will soon BOTH be in their respective 30-yr cool cycles and the next solar cycle will likely be the weakest since 1790, which guarantees global temp trends may well turn negative in 5~7 years…. Oooops….

    Dr. Mann knows this, which is why he said, “climate “scientists” don’t need no steeeekin’ data.”

    If “steeeeekin’ data” were used, CAGW would already have been run through the steeeeekin’ shredder…. That will not do….

    The new dynamic is altruistic science based on feeeeeelings and “good” inteeeeeeeentions. Data is just sooooo 20th century…

    To cover their bets, grant-grubbing scientists will continue to manipulate the steeeekin’ raw data upwards and continue to churn out pal-reviewed papers like KARL2015 to keep this charade going for as long as possible…

    CAGW has become a joke…

    • “… grant-grubbing scientists will continue to manipulate the steeeekin’ raw data upwards …”

      They will continue to manipulate the raw data upwards in the present, but will manipulate the raw data of the past downwards since that double whammy makes the false trend look more impressive. And yet, they still can’t show CO2 warms the planet to the “you will fry” levels predicted.

  34. Michael Mann says his head is buried in “climate-data output.” I always thought his head was buried somewhere else – like up in the dark recesses of his own self, to be polite..

  35. As I recall the quote from the Bogart film, he didn’t say what everyone says he said. I believe the quote was “We don’t have to show you any steenkeen badges!”

    • According to the Wiki, it’s sort of a mixture;

      Gold Hat: “We are Federales… you know, the mounted police.”
      Dobbs: “If you’re the police, where are your badges?”
      Gold Hat: “Badges? We ain’t got no badges. We don’t need no badges! I don’t have to show you any stinkin’ badges!”

  36. People can feel God and spirituality in their lives. Billions of humans profess this to be so everyday.

    The Democratic Party and the Left in the US can feel Climate Change in their everyday lives, when they fly, when they see a flood or fire on the TV news.

    Both are religions.
    Michael Mann needs to change the name of his institue or center (whatever it is) to the Penn State School of Climate Divinity.

    • @Joel, you are correct. People have an innate need for religion
      http://listverse.com/2013/06/13/8-reasons-people-embrace-religion/

      The climate brigade is “enlightened” beyond the traditional religions and this is reinforced in their leftist university echo chambers.

      But because the climate zealots are actually mentally weak and superstitious, climate change becomes their “religion” and they are not intellectual enough to accept the trivial role man plays on the planet. None of these high priests has the fortitude to stare into the abyss.

      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/religious-people-are-less-intelligent-than-atheists-according-to-analysis-of-scores-of-scientific-8758046.html

      • The abyss is where mankind is powerless.
        Admitting being powerless would be the shaman voodoo witch doctor telling his village he can’t help them from thevolcano. That won’t happen. Its about power and control.

        The Left covets power. They lie for it. They manufacture “data” for it.
        And Science has died under Climatism.

      • How telling that religion is summons up so often, and whipped in effigy when the beast that rages now was obviously spawned by team science . . by people with IQ well above average . . Seems to me that abyss is a bit much to face for some.

      • JohnKnight said-

        “How telling that religion is summons up so often, and whipped in effigy when the beast that rages now was obviously spawned by team science . . by people with IQ well above average . . Seems to me that abyss is a bit much to face for some.”

        First-I want to see the IQ tests myself. I’m not buying the idea that all scientists are smarter than average….not anymore.

        Second-Ftop-T’s linked list didn’t define religion as anything that required belief in a “God” or “deity” per se…it was more like a list of 8 things that COULD answer the question posed by the author- “Why do people have the need to “believe fervently in the very unlikely”?

        If you define religion as-“believing fervently in the very unlikely”, then yes, AGW and CAGW both meet that definition of “religion”. So would believing that your cancer stricken friend is going to recover, or that you are going to drive an automobile your entire life and never get in a car accident. I snorted in derision when I read FTop’s comment, but then I read his link and reconsidered it’s message as related to climate scientists- Here are the 8 reasons-

        8-People are Superstitious
        7-People can’t help anthropomorphism
        6-Need for Purpose
        5-Belief in Justice
        4-Hope for Afterlife
        3-We need our Silverback
        2-Imbibing Special Plants
        1-It brings us together.

        Since just about ALL of those things can be considered to be “natural”, the-result-of-evolution, enlightened, instinctual, bred-into-our-dna characteristics, then it looks like “religion-fervent belief in the very unlikely” is actually a very scientifically proven, basic human behavior. :) *evil grin* In fact, it would be the 10% (according to the article) of people who have no religious/spiritual characteristics…that are UNnatural mutations. *another evil grin*

      • Aphan,

        “Since just about ALL of those things can be considered to be “natural”, the-result-of-evolution, enlightened, instinctual, bred-into-our-dna characteristics, then it looks like “religion-fervent belief in the very unlikely” is actually a very scientifically proven, basic human behavior. :) ”

        Well, there exists this other potential, having to do with the ramifications of being made by a God . . which renders (if true) most of what you said there . . irrelevant, it seems to me. Certainly the very unlikely part ; )

        I’m not sure if you are reasoning within the “Yes God exists” potential fully, when considering that potential. It seems you sort of stay in the maybe, so to speak (or even the probably not), analysis wise . . and that just won’t get you far, in terms understanding what is going on IF yes, God exists.

        Facing THAT “abyss”, fully, might I think help you understand what I wrote to them fellas with the whips ; )

    • Aphan:

      “If you define religion as-“believing fervently in the very unlikely”,”

      That is a ridiculous definition of ‘religion’. Fervence has nothing to do with it. You have provided a reasonable definition of “superstition”.

      From http://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion

      “A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.”

      CAGW meets every nuance of this definition. Like communism, it is a religion of irreligion worshipping, all things considered, a pretty boring false god.

      • Crispin in Waterloo,

        Calm down.

        The author of the ARTICLE/link that was introduced into this discussion by FTOP used that term, not me. I simply stated that if someone (like the author and perhaps FTOP who posted it) views “religion” that way-then that person should admit that CAGW fits that description and = religion. The 8 reasons why someone would “need religion” listed in the article would thus apply very well to the reasons why someone would NEED to believe in CAGW.

        I never said it was a good or acceptable definition, or that I agreed with it. I was pointing out to JohnKnight that even the author’s wacky descriptions and reasons for religion can be applied to CAGW and that they don’t even need a “supernatural” element….just regular old social science accepted human “needs”. :)

  37. This must be the reason why the IPCC dropped his hockey stick graph from their reports.

  38. Mann’s statement is a very long-winded way of saying “we don’t know what is happening or why but it can’t be good. There for we’re going to stop looking and go with our hearts.”

    I can’t say I’m amazed or even surprised. It is what it always has been – a gut feeling frustrated by a lack of convincing evidence.

  39. “Fundamentally, I’m a climate scientist and have spent much of my career with my head buried in climate-model output and observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change,”

    this is the very definition of confirmation bias

  40. Grist ran an article, basically a Chinese Whisper of another article, in response to the recent post here about Climate Scientists non-use of renewable energy.
    Seemingly Mann had chirped/twitted/faceborked that he, in his home, bought and used only ‘renewable’ windmill electricity and didn’t mind paying extra for it.

    If the guy cannot/will not hand over his work emails/data/computer code because it is “private”, (stuff that me & you taxpayer paid for), what chance have we of seeing proof of what goes between him and his electricity supplier?
    Mister, you are a Public Servant – you do what the public ask of you. Geddit? OK?
    And as a public servant, your pay/wage/salary comes from the public purse, from little people who will be jailed if they don’t pay your salary in the form of taxes levied upon them.
    And you say you ‘don’t mind paying extra’ for your personal services out of this tax-generated salary.
    Mister, you could be Dumb For America

    The guy has removed himself from reality exactly the same way as Marie Antoinette did…

    • In England, Australia and New Zealand (NZ) public servants are usually called civil servants. I met one once in NZ he said “I may be a civil servant but I don’t have to be civil nor serve anyone!” (Yes it is an “internal” joke). The arrogance of these types knows no bounds.

    • That claim really shows that he either has no understanding of how renewables work or is a liar. I would put my money on the latter.

      Unless he is off the grid and self powering his home with a personal windmill or wind farm AND not using a backup generator, he is not just paying for and using windmill electricity. He might be “paying” for it, but that is just a paper shuffle. My Pennsylvania Dutch grandfather had a word for people like Mann: shyster.

      I am pretty sure Pop Pop meant it in the Germanic sense.

      • If they ever revive Bugs Bunny cartoons, they can have a Mikey Mann character who hands Bugs the inevitable business card that reads “A. Sheister – Climate Scientist” LOL

  41. In Mann’s defense, there are a lot of signals in need of being teased out. It’s tricky. Take the signal for space aliens. Naturally, they don’t want us to know they’re here, so are trying to blend in as much as possible. You just have to know where to look and what to look for.

  42. This just proved CAGW is indeed a religion. Mann is making the argument that an unseen force is directing events and that unseen force is evident through those actions. That is the exact agrument of many religions and the basis of Intelligent Design. By Mann’s standards, Intelligent Design is now science and needs no proof. It can be seen all around us. Science and religion are now one.

  43. “Fundamentally, I’m a climate scientist and have spent much of my career with my head buried in climate-model output and observational climate data trying to tease out the signal of human-caused climate change,”

    If you wanted proof of confirmation bias there it is. He found a signal because he was looking for it. I can’t count how many times I went looking for something and found something else (I look at time series data and crush my own hypotheses on a daily basis). If the signal is real, you don’t have to ‘tease’ it out. It will be there. All YOU the scientist have to do is remove the noise and if a signal exists it will be there. What’s that? You don’t know what’s in the noise? I guess you don’t know what’s in the ‘signal’ either, do you?

    • Yup! Confirmation bias is the essence of the AGW BS story. Just do the right amount of “adjustments” to the “data” and the right amount of “smoothing” and you can make it all look like it moves in lock step. Then some more data comes in, and you have to start all over again. Only in this field of psuedo science does the so-called “scientist” begin with the answer he KNOWS is right and work backwards to “tease out” the so-called “evidence.”

      It’s time for people around the world to vote out of office EVERY politician that promotes, votes for, or speaks favorably of the “climate change” BS.

  44. ‘we don’t need no stinking data’

    – 25 juli – 3 augustus 1911 (hoogste temperatuur 35,6 ℃)
    – 10 juli – 17 juli 1912, (31,5 ℃)
    – 10 juni – 19 juni 1917 (32,4 ℃)
    – 11 juli – 16 juli 1928 (32,4 ℃)
    – 26 augustus – 30 augustus 1930 (32,8 ℃)
    – 10 augustus – 21 augustus 1932 (33,2 ℃)
    – 17 juni – 24 juni 1936 (32,1 ℃)
    – 30 juli – 7 augustus 1938 (33,2 ℃)
    – 26 augustus – 31 augustus 1942 (31,1 ℃)
    – 25 juli – 1 augustus 1943 (30,4 ℃)
    – 18 augustus – 25 augustus 1944 (34,7 ℃)
    – 30 mei – 4 juni 1947 (33,7 ℃)
    – 25 juni – 30 juni 1947 (36,8 ℃)
    – 22 juli – 30 juli 1947 (32,5 ℃)
    – 10 juni – 14 juni 1948 (31,7 ℃)
    – 2 juni – 7 juni 1950 (32,1 ℃)

    No longer a heat wave.

    It is now crystal clear that people did not know how to read temperature before 1951.

    http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/26093180/__KNMI_schrapt_hittegolven__.html

    “Of the forty heatwaves in our country, almost half turn out to be NO heat wave. That says KNMI which again has thoroughly studied the historical weather data.”

    This is what is left.

    https://www.knmi.nl/nederland-nu/klimatologie/lijsten/hittegolven

    Old data before the change.

    http://www.npogeschiedenis.nl/nieuws/2015/juli/Hittegolven-in-Nederland.html

  45. Re Data and models increasingly unnecessary ? Doesn’t this suggest climate programmers are equally unnecessary ? The proven history of wildly inaccurate climate models are at least consistently wrong in one direction . That programing bias raises the question of bought outcomes .
    Would any climate model programmer have a job if they produced projections of modest warming or god forbid cooling ?
    Imagine the USA Navy going to Congress demanding $$Trillions in extra funding to address the threat of a made up enemy based on …. model projections .

    How many seconds would Navy brass have jobs if that was their explanation ? When challenged they reply the data is increasingly unnecessary they can see it on TV .

    Yes climate changes and hopefully the world is warming , Put the $$Trillions into something that produces better modellers or better yet pays down the debt once in a while ,

    • Well I cannot see it on current televisions, so I propose we demand high definition, 3D, plasma televisions and high speed internet access from the government as part of the Michael Mann Early Warning Climate System Act. It won’t cost us a thing. We can just use the money we no longer need to funnel into the development of obsolete “tools” to “tease out a human signal” !!!!

  46. “Since we don’t need to [rely] on data anymore, and rely just on our senses, we can shut down all those climate programs that take in millions of federal and state tax dollars now”

    If it was only millions it wouldn’t be the problem it is.

    But it’s three orders of magnitude greater than that, and while that might not matter to a climate scientist, it sure as hell matters to an accountant.

Comments are closed.