Josh writes:
On this historic Brexit day the fun has not been confined to this continent. Over in the US they have had a ‘hearing’ on Climate Science with three of the world’s most eminent climate scientists. Michael Mann was there too.
The Hearing- Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method, House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. On the Panel were Dr. Judith Curry, Dr. John Christy. Dr. Michael Mann, and Dr. Roger Pielke Jr.
Worth watching (nearly) the whole thing.
Josh
Added: links to written testimony are within each name. – Anthony
Witnesses
President, Climate Forecast Applications Network; Professor Emeritus, Georgia Institute of Technology
Professor and Director, Earth System Science Center, NSSTC, University of Alabama at Huntsville; State Climatologist, Alabama
Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science, Pennsylvania State University; Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC), Pennsylvania State University
Professor, Environmental Studies Department, University of Colorado
UPDATE: From Marc Morano at Climate Depot
AP’s Borenstein calls out Michael Mann for a whopper: ‘Mann said he didn’t call Curry a denier. But in his written testimony he called Curry ‘a climate science denier’
Associated Press:
At first Mann said he didn’t call Curry a denier. But in his written not oral testimony he called Curry “a climate science denier.” Mann said there’s a difference between denying climate change and “denying established science” on how much humans cause climate change, which he said Curry did.
[Also see: Warmist Michael Mann tells whopper at congressional science hearing?]
AP:
Mann and Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher of California both compared the other side’s behavior to the former Soviet Union under Josef Stalin. Mann first raised the Stalin analogy, then Rohrabacher used the comparison four times after that to talk about Mann and other mainstream climate scientists. “For scientists to call names to beat someone into submission, that’s a Stalinist tactic,” Rohrabacher said.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I must admit that this is very difficult to watch. Seeing Michael Mann utterly abuse and mis-apply the 97% statistic, when we all know that when this number is articulated properly we are all in the 97%, is utterly grating. At a US government hearing !! And then seeing democratic senators do the same “we need another 96 MM’s here to balance out the view” makes my blood boil. The liberal left ….. OMG they are so in the wrong place,
A Disgrace to His Profession – Absolutely the right title!
The four lies Mann told the congressional committee. Delingpole has the evidence complete with tweets from Mann.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/31/delingpole-michael-mann-vs-the-truth-at-congressional-climate-hearing/
James Delingpole made me laugh outloud! As one commenter pointed out “Good thing he was restraining himself….” Best insulting run on sentence of all time…(even before I looked up cackhanded!)
“Apart from being a tetchy, hotheaded, rude, bullying, cackhanded, ignorant, malevolent and embarrassingly useless excuse for a scientist, Professor Michael Mann – the guy behind the serially-discredited Hockey Stick – is also the most outrageous liar.”
He’s an hornswoggler too.
Examples of hornswoggle in a sentence – Merriam Webster
“I think we’ve been hornswoggled by that carnival barker.”
I listened to the entire hearing yesterday, and while I don’t have any individual experience with any of the people on the panel, I can now understand why Dr. Mann is not liked, and globally not liked at that. For a scientist he speaks very well, very little equivocation that one would normally associate with having personal or professional doubts about the subject, seems to transition smoothly from one topic to the next, almost glib, which is strange for a profession that should be characterized by caution and hesitancy to over-reach. I saw those qualities in the other 3 panelists, but not Dr. Mann.
He seemed to have no problem veering off into innuendo and personal attacks and weaved them into the threads of his testimony. And of course there was the preening megalomania of him reciting his CV again, even though the chairman had already done that for everyone (no one else saw the need). I heard all the science words and phrases but the one thing I did not hear from him was uncertainty, about anything, as though reading from a well-memorized script and the only thing he had to worry about was the presentation style. And then going off on Pielke and Curry repeatedly, right out in the open in one of the halls of Congress, while still portraying himself as the victim.
He had absolutely the biggest whoppers I have ever heard from a scientist, including the proposition that “climate change denier” and “climate science denier” were 2 fundamentally different things that should not be confused. Not to mention that it’s perfectly OK to label someone either way in any event. But of course my favorite whopper was that the consensus has the same acceptance rate in the scientific community and the public at large as the theory of gravity. Wow! Just Wow! Does anyone here care to step off a climate science cliff?
So yeah, now I understand. I hope I never meet him. I do hope to meet Dr. Curry, Dr. Christy , and Dr. Pielke at some point—I think they handled themselves well, refrained from personal attacks like adults should, gave their opinions without advocacy, and generally tried to be good stewards and citizens.
I think no one takes him seriously!
The problem is marty that people do take him seriously. This battle is far from over. Here in Australia we had a Cat 4 cyclone hit land a couple of days ago very very quickly becoming a Cat 3. I will await Jennifer Marohasy’s prognostication on this as Australia’s previous Cat 4 (supposedly) Marcia was actually a Cat 3 when it hit land thanks to Jen checking the facts. First up we have a Greens Rep stating that there is blood on the hands of the Government because we still have coal fired power stations – and that is where the problem remains marty – they still get air time and there is a generation of children that have been indoctrinated into this way of thinking. It is, sadly, a battle far from won. Having said that we will prevail. Also a quickie to Bob Carter – a giant lost to the art of clear thinking.
I agree! I wait for the moment when the current climate trend is over and the temperatures are falling again. Then comes a new generation of alarmists, who then predict the ice age, and the downfall of mankind.
Such a lost opportunity Judith missed. 100% of the panel Curry, Christy, Mann and Pielke form part of the 97% of scientists who believe anthropogenic CO2 is warming the earth to some extent. That’s what the consensus actually is…and not that most of the warming is man made.
I think that rigour was what was needed here Tim, and the only one lacking style was – oh take a guess? Actually I will give you odds of 10,000:1 on Mann style.
Yeah, I’ve watched the whole thing now and the 97% argument was brought up but not pressed. Mann showed his true colours. He acts like a child.
Michael Mann Just Jumped the Climate Change Shark
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/04/02/michael-mann-just-jumped-the-climate-change-shark/