Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Judith Curry – Climate scientist Michael Mann seems to think his personal distress at having his theories and scientific conduct criticised is comparable to the suffering of holocaust survivor Martin Niemöller, who endured eight years of internment in NAZI concentration camps because of his outspoken opposition to Adolf Hitler.
Michael Mann: If You Believe in Science You Must Now Make Your Voice Heard
…
That evidence now shows us that we face a stark choice, between a future with a little more climate change that we will still have to adapt to and cope with, and one with catastrophic climate change that will threaten the future of life as we know it.
And so here we are, at a crossroads.
Let me be blunt.
Never before have we witnessed science under the kind of assault it is being subject to right now in this country.
Nor have we witnessed an assault on the environment like the one we are witnessing in the current political atmosphere.
I will borrow and adapt—for our current time and place—the words of Martin Niemöller, a prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps:
First they came for the immigrants and I did not speak out—
Because I was not an immigrant.
Then they came for the scientists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a scientist.
Then they came for the environmentalists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not an environmentalist.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Friends, let this not be our legacy.
…
Read more (transcript of a speech to students and parents at Green Mountain College): https://www.ecowatch.com/michael-mann-green-mountain-college-2414347465.html
Why do people still listen to this clown?
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Well, Mann does seem assured about historical parallels. I just think he has the sides reversed.
Well his choice in quotes certainly could be reversed
There, that’s better.
Then they came for me….and everybody clapped an cheered.
Mann says: “Let me be blunt.
Never before have we witnessed science under the kind of assault it is being subject to right now in this country.”
In truth, IMO, it is not science under assault it is his FINDINGS that are under assault. (never mind how good his science/study is!!! His statement “under assault” is not very accurate either.Questioned, yeah.
“In truth, IMO, it is not science under assault it is his FINDINGS that are under assault.”
That was my thought, too. Mann is equating his Hockey Stick to the whole of Science. Mann implies Science and his Hockey Stick are unassailable. He wants them to be unassailable. When they start whining they are losing the argument.
Actually, it IS science which is being assaulted, but the assault is by flaky climate liars coming out with more and more ridiculous, unsupported press releases posing as scholarly articles.
Mann distortions the truth, especially science, every chance he gets.
Mann’s only blunt quality is his ability to lie and go after others who call him out.
He’s not a scientist–he’s a political activist, with an ego to match the universe.
He’s the one assaulting science…
And he’s projecting like the pro leftist activist that he is…
I think he is lying scum who adds to the ignorance and confusion of mankind.
[snip – you’ve changed handles from Jonathan Wundersamer, and in the last day produced several posts that violate site policy – banned – Anthony]
I am carefully not going to say anything about Mikey Mann because if I spoke my mind, a wonderfully good man, Anthony Watts, would justifiably ban me. Good on you for how you run this site Anthony. I say this as someone who has suffered your wrath. I still know how to spell cretin. I have differences with you, mainly because you don’t call the fools out in strong language, but boy oh boy do I have respect for you.
What a disgusting comment from someone who has given science a bad name.
We need to stop calling Michael Mann a scientist because he is anything but. His ‘research’ is based on voo doo statistics, he refuses to share his data for replication, and his papers are so dense and obfuscating they could have been written by a bot. Anyone who questions his work is “too stupid to comprehend his ‘science'”, and when criticized, he sues first, and then plays the victim.
Please, from now on, everyone refer to him using an appropriate title: Charlatan, Con Artist, Fraud, Quack, Witch Doctor, Grifter, Sham, etc.
While I perfectly agree to the first paragraph of your post, I veto your suggested solution in the second! It is very tempting but, this way we would put ourselves down to the same level – it will not be helpful when you try to debate with somebody who is not totally brainwashed yet.
I understand the sentiment, but as someone who lives and works in the world of science I think we need to make it clear that this type of behavior is quite normal among those who carry the label scientist. It is, unforatunately, not an exception but a very common phenomenon. Individuals must be judged by their own actions and words, not by their labels. Fortunately, with someone like MM it is all too easy to see the lack of quality in both.
Louis Hooffstetter,
Slight correction. based on a recently published paper in Sociology, it’s obvious that his papers were written by a Social Constructed Conceptual Penis.
@TheDoctor
and it would defame all self respecting Charlatans, Con Artists, Frauds, Quacks, Witch Doctors, Grifters, Shams, etc.to be assocaited with Mann.
Louis H.
Surely, under a Republican administration, everyone, including multiple Nobble Laureate, repeat Oscar winner & multiple Olympic gold-medallist, Doc ‘Doctor’ Mann, should seek employment to pay their way.
Indeed, Doc M has done so:
“Several years ago Michael Mann found a gig that would potentially pay him big bucks and notoriety. He left the realm of science and now peddles a far-left climate change agenda in the spirit of the western snake-oil salesmen during the 1800s.” – many thanks to
pyeatte May 25, 2017 at 6:59 am – who is spot on!
Indeed, so ahead of his time is Doc M, that he obviously sought gainful employment under a Democratic administration, when such activity was optional . . . .
Auto
I try to be as polite and charitable as possible (I’m not always successful),
so I submit that his title should be Scientist Manqué.
Several years ago Michael Mann found a gig that would potentially pay him big bucks and notoriety. He left the realm of science and now peddles a far-left climate change agenda in the spirit of the western snake-oil salesmen during the 1800s.
science is under threat from jerks like Mann.
…and so is Western Civilization. Heed Mann’s nefarious pronouncements and we’d have to curtail productivity to the gruesome edge of survival.
And I think in his devious mind, it would be worth it. What a schmuck!
Words fail me – what a hypocrite.
That was also the conclusion of one of the senators at the recent senate hearing.
Mann STARTED the assault on science, with his hockey stick charts.
Josh could make a great satire on Mann attacking science with a hockey stick !!
*Speechless*
yeah..the pity is?
MANN isnt
Actually, a broken tool makes the most noise.
The problem is, as with most well-crafted propaganda, there is a kernel of truth in what he says. Science is under siege, but he talks about his junk science as if it’s the real science.
We really need to get him together with a real scientist/skeptic to actually debate science. He cannot, as he nothing at all that can stand the light of day. All of his arguments are ad hominem and false.
Exactly – and it seems he’s also forgotten that it was the alarmists that were looking to have skeptics locked up.
‘it seems he’s also forgotten that it was the alarmists that were looking to have skeptics locked up.’
Exactly. It is the climate extremists who keep on promising to put into prison those who question their data and findings. Some have even promised death to those who dare question their findings. Weird.
I think psychologists call it “projection” when people accuse others of doing things they themselves are guilty of. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
High 5 higley7
Real science is under attack by the likes of the ‘clevah’ who think that they can fiddle and hide the evidence and no one is as clevah so no one will ever to be able to prove the BS.
Yesterday and the day before I read the concatenation of papers by M&M in which they politely and excruciatingly dismantle the claims of Dr Mann that the 14th century was cooler than the world at present.
http://www.multi-science.co.uk/mcintyre-mckitrick.pdf
The lengths Dr Mann went to to ‘cleverly’ change the centre of his data sets so that the MWP would appear to be cooler than now is amazing – creating, disfiguring, misleading, staunchly defending, ultimately made of the same cloth that propagandists used in pre-War II Germany to disguise the truth – the cleverly constructed lie.
It is therefore not completely surprising that we see a news item like today’s where perps portray themselves as victims. I am wondering if something went badly wrong in the DC courtroom with the eternal case against Mark Steyn. As was asked about the little king in Shrek, “Compensating for something?”
I came across stuff like this in my studies years ago. Naturally what Mann is trying to do is sickening,
Below are some examples of “experts” in their field and how Martin Niemöller’s proverb apply’s to them.
And yeah those who don’t learn from the past are destine to repeat it. You can spot Mann and his cronies a mile away.
http://ldn-knigi.lib.ru/JUDAICA/Flieger/Jued_Flieg1.htm
michael
Dictatorial little Nazi.
I think that title is better applied to Cook, who like to dress up like an SS officer.
Well, I guess since John Cook The Books likes to photoshop himself into Nazi uniforms there is a tenuous connection here.
I have been trying for some time to write a poem about John Cook The Books but have been having immense difficulties. Its like trying to write a poem about pond scum — as the name says it all.
Sort of playing off a really bad previous poem i wrote, I thought I might work through the use of “fairy” tales. After well over a year this is all I have been able to come up with.
(I)
Like Tweedledee and Tweedledum
Art and Science create a sum
Each with the other constitute
Each for the other substitute
(II)
Solid science is oversold
Appearance is as good as gold
I am the goose of the golden shell
With Art the inner gooey jell
Maybe with another year of work I might be able to add to this — or maybe throw it out and start over again.
Eugene WR Gallun
Jeez Eugene, I can barely keep up with the science never mind Shakespeare. 🙂
(III) ??????????????
Art and Science a warning carry
A principled precautionary
The earth might burn and all might die
So “wolf” is always what i cry
?????????????
Eugene WR Gallun
Damn — Art and Science a message carry — much better
Eugene WR Gallun
Final
(III)
Art and Science a warning carry
A principled precautionary
The earth might burn and all will die
So “Wolf” is always what I cry
Eugene WR Gallun
Michael Mann seems to think the job of a scientist is to convince the public. No, Mikey, the job of a scientist is to convince other scientists, not folks unequipped to even have an opinion. Of course, this would be most difficult for the scientifically lacking. Like Mikey,for example.
“Michael Mann seems to think the job of a scientist is to convince the public.”
He is of course correct.
If you are funded by the NSF, that is crucial part of each grant, under the banner “out reach”
What’s really sad is the number of trolls who have no problem replacing science with government funded propaganda.
The job of other scientists is to reproduce the work of their fellows to demonstrate the validity of their assertions. What is so wonderful about McIntyre and McKitrick is they were able to replicate Mann’s work exactly, something emphasized in their follow-up paper, by reproducing the defects and errors in the works of Dr Mann. Thus they demonstrated the claim that the MWP was ‘not there’ or was ‘cooler’ than now was in error. The world was warmer than now 800 years ago.
Mann next went on a jag to try and prove that the MWP was real but local or regional at best. This too has failed in the subsequent years, disproven by the numerous records from around the world, NH and SH.
The problem for Dr Mann is that he started with a conclusion and set about to ‘support it’ with clever fiddles of the data processing. He clearly is of the opinion that he is so clever no one else will be able to see his fiddles if he hides them well. I have met others with this same attitude. Turn inward and you lose perspective. It turns out that Constable Plod is still able to track down and arrest Mr Sharp.
The claims about his personal suffering are at least partly true, because he is definitely feeling the sharp end of the stick these past years. The comparison of his self-induced comeuppance with the horrors experienced by the good Reverend is a demonstration of an incapacity for genuine empathy.
“He clearly is of the opinion that he is so clever no one else will be able to see his fiddles”
I don’t think he’s even clever enough to see his own fiddles. Delusion can be a funny thing …
“…the job of a scientist is to convince other scientists…”
uh, no. The job of a scientist is to follow scientific method. The most honorable scientists will be the ones who most fervently try to disprove their own theories. What other scientists think be damned.
Deluded is the word.
“Then they came for the fakers…the liars who claimed to have won Nobel prizes when they didnt…
and no one was there to speak for me”
TFTFY, Mikey.
I thought nothing Michael Mann did could be worse than what he has done, but his adaptation of Niemöller’s words has proven my thought was wrong.
Richard
He did it again:
When you thought it cannot get any morally lower …
The sad thing is, there are too many rationally challenged out there who take him serious and cannot see that he himself is one of the people who try to silence real science. It’s not just a text book example of Dunning-Kruger at work – he is a perp posing as victim!
” text book example of Dunning-Kruger”
Wrong. Whether you like it or not Mann is an expert in his field, the amateurs here are the ones filled with misplaced confidence and certainty. This is DK central.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
It’s a shame that his field is fraudulent science…. as the Mann Hockey stick proves…
If Mikey is an expert in his field, that’s just a testament as to what a sad shape his field is in
You misquoted me:
“It’s not(!) just a text book example of Dunning-Kruger at work…”
BTW what field is he an expert in?
– Misrepresenting science?
– Hiding declines?
– Megalomania? (Hey, I am a citizen of the EU – Does he accept me as a fellow Noble-Prize laureate?)
tony mcleod:
Don’t be silly
Mann is a bumptious ch@rlatan whose ‘work’ has been repeatedly rejected as being incompetent or fr@udulent, and I am still waiting for him to ‘put up’ on his threat to me; see this.
Richard
My link did not work. It is this
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/05/12/a-mann-uva-email-not-discussed-here-before-claims-by-mann-spliced-and-diced/
Richard
tony mcleod May 25, 2017 at 4:42 am
Wrong. Whether you like it or not Mann is an expert in his field,
You contradict yourself.
Dunning-Kruger is not in his field of study or practice.
Nor yours or mine.
But as to ethics and honesty that is open to debate for all.
As for an expert in ones field that is wild open. It is how one uses that expertise that is the issue.
The fact that Mr. Mann attempted to label opponents as having a medical condition so as to discredit them speaks volumes.
No one is questioning science tony, merely you and Mr Mann.
Credibility is a difficult attribute to gain, very easy to lose.
michael
Embrace the hockey stick Richard, you and I are part of the root cause. There are hundreds that correlate.
http://blog.dssresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/world_population_1050_to_2050.jpg
Tony, if you think you are a Part of the problem, why aren’t you solving your part of the problem instead of trolling here? If everyone who claims population is a “problem” would self-solve, there would be no population “problem”. 😉
Dr. Mann’s recent testimony before the recent house science hearing was absolutely gobsmacking. No scientist should express that much confidence and certainty. Any scientist who expresses that much confidence is not credible.
I can’t remember exactly but he compared the certainty about global warming theory to the theory about gravity. That is literally not credible … literally … I know what the word means.
In defence of the people who post here, there are many with advanced credentials. Pay attention and you will see who is who.
Science has a problem. It is deeply corrupt and unreliable. The latest salvo across its bow is a book called Rigor Mortis. It points out that the majority (perhaps the vast majority, depending how you count it) of medical research is worthless. It can’t be replicated, sometimes even by the original researchers.
The rules of the game guarantee that researchers are better off publishing junk than working hard to produce first rate science. That applies in all branches of science.
Even in science, the prognostications of experts are no better than the predictions generated by a dart-throwing chimp. link
Yes, Dr. Mann is an expert. No, that does not make him credible.
To the left, an expert is anyone who agrees with them.
Little Mikey’s seminal work has been shredded by many, many people. The only thing he’s an expert in is making a fool of himself.
What’s the saddest of all is that McClod actually believes his post is relevant to anything.
BTW, I notice that like most environmentalists, McClod actually believes that humans are the root cause of all problems.
tony mcleod:
I don’t “embrace” the joyous news of the human race flourishing: I applaud it.
If you think population is a problem then reduce the problem by one in the only way that you are entitled to do. That would have the benefit of preventing you from disrupting WUWT threads with off-topic irrelevancies such as graphs of population growth.
Richard
Amatuers like Newton or Galileo? How about DaVinci or Coppernicus? A scientists job is to find the truth not to convince the public of it. Once your job turn’s to advocacy you leave the science your a lawyer.
Mann is an expert in his field
===============
study after study shows that expert opinion is more likely wrong than the opinion of the layman.
the problem is that experts over-estimate how much they know on a subject. The assume that anything they don’t know must not be important. Scientists 50 years ago were equally certain that there was nothing important that they did not know.
if true, if scientists are correct, then why has the public been paying scientists for the past 50 years? why are we paying scientists to study “settled science”? one might as well pay scientist to determine if water is wet.
tony mcleod
I challenge your assertion that I am an amateur, that I have misplaced confidence and certainty.
Put up or shut up..
RE: tony mcleod’s world population growth chart @ur momisugly May 25, 2017 at 5:33 am.
I seem to recall my World History instructor telling us back in my college days that WWII resulted in the deaths of some 50 million people worldwide. WWII was so devastating that the world’s population was still lower in 1950 than it was in 1940. So I was told.
If that is indeed true, then another great world war certainly would produce the desired reduction in population that Mr. Mcleod appears to be looking for. One can only guess if he is actually rooting for one.
He’s an “expert” in his field because he has the media on his side and had the government on his side. You can get far with powerful allies like that; lots of guaranteed funding and continuous, unrelenting favorable news coverage.
tony mcleod
The scientific community is occupied by academics who are more often wrong, than right.
Otherwise, what would be the point of experiments?
Apparently Michael Mann doesn’t have the scientific integrity to admit his hockey stick experiment was wrong, in the face of considerable criticism.
Furthermore, science itself is rarely 100% correct, it is only correct by degrees, judged at a particular moment in time.
Science is secure in one thing only, its faith in uncertainty, without that there would be no science.
Actually, most experts do know much more about their subjects than do other people. The trouble is that this gives them the illusion that they can predict things. “You should do ‘this’ because I am an expert”, is the prediction that ‘this’ will be a successful strategy. That prediction is probably wrong.
Experts are frustrated by idiots who argue with them when those idiots can’t get even the basic facts right. That’s fair. On the other hand, experts generally do not recognize their limits. Their mantra should be: “A dart-throwing monkey predicts better than I do.” Hubris, thy name is expert.
CD in WI:
World population probably grew from 1940 to 1950, despite WWII, religious war during the partition of India and the Chinese civil war.
https://www.census.gov/population/international/data/worldpop/table_history.php
The postwar Western baby boom helped.
tony McLeod, in addition to questioning the smoothness of the world population, the title refers to a “growth rate”…which is not plotted.
Your chart has errors of commission and omission. Double-whammy.
Mann may be outstanding in his field but so are most Dairy Cows
Once again, the clod demonstrates his absolute lack of skills on multiple levels.
1) mr. clod assumes to know more about a “soft” pseudo science, based on unstated reasons.
2) t clod fails to read the entire article in unbiased terms, instead he assumes a pro mannian bias from the start.
A) If manniacal was any sort of true expert in a field, he would not vehemently react to all criticisms.
– a) i.e. being a true expert in a field assumes manniacal is comfortable with the surety of his knowledge.
Instead manniacal reacts rabidly to the smallest criticisms, even from friends.
Nor does mannian mind bringing his reactionary verbal assaults into public places
Lastly, manniacal does not restrict his disagreement to specific scientific or mathematic concerns, but rapidly brings personal mann emotes and general character assaults against mann’s detractors.
Based on mann’s demeanor and vehement rabid responses, it is clear that mann is neither confident in his alleged research or in mann’s personal knowledge.
t. clod;
If you had bothered to read your wiki reference, you would have noticed a list of “related” topics:
“Cognitive dissonance
Grandiose delusions
Hanlon’s razor
Hubris
Impostor syndrome
Lake Wobegon effect
Narcissism
Not even wrong
Overconfidence effect
Self-deception
Self-efficacy
Self-serving bias
Superiority complex
Ultracrepidarianism”
When compared to many of the criticisms addressed towards mann, mann’s work, mann’s adherence to scientific process, etc. Most if not all of these related psychological problems are identified as clear mannian personal issues.
Evidence of weak psychological factors are directly related to an individual’s ability to remain mature and civil during in depth reviews.
Another factor where maturity should be demonstrated is an individual’s willingness to admit and then correct errors.
manniacal admits no errors, manniacal refuses to correct errors, manniacal refuses to acknowledge corrections proposed by experts more experienced or more knowledgeable in any field.
Funny how on a poisoned and dying planet, an ever expanding population is somehow living longer, fatter, happier and more cimfortsble and prosperous lives.
Nothing funny about the hateful um…folks…who cannot stand that reality, and stop at nothing to reverse it,
while in the meantime denying it.
Tony alludes to potential issues of a growing human population.
How can we be assured that such a large population will have enough food? We should encourage and applaud efforts that increase the base of the food chain.
Carbon Dioxide is the base of the food chain for all carbon based life forms.
You could take everyone alive today and place them ALL on the islands of Hawaii with room to spare leaving the remainder of the world unpopulated
“How can we be assured that such a large population will have enough food?”
We could start by restoring all those fertile acres in Iowa that are currently being sucked up by wind turbines. I’ve heard they take 3-5 acres each, but even one acre each adds up to an incredible amount of land being taken out of production. I’ve done searches on how many there are and can’t find a number, but one energy company is going to add 1,000 more…there goes at least another 1,000 acres of land for at least 20 years.
The “Dunning-Kruger effect” is just a pompous and superfluous name for the trivial observation that people tend to feel more certain about some things than they should. Do your opponent a favour – just call them “moron” and save them a trip to wikipedia.
“It’s not just a text book example of Dunning-Kruger at work”
Nearly everyone suffers from D-K when invoking it on others while not knowing what it is. It would be easier to just use plain words when insulting someone: “I insult you!” would suffice. Then we might engage a conversation in which we explore why you feel the need to publicly insult anyone.
D-K simply refers to a normalization phenomenon by which persons consider themselves to be normal when in fact they may be above or below normal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Looks like someone is worried about his paycheck. Perhaps Dr Mann should seek a private gig, I am sure there are many believers who would happily pay him and fund his propaganda.
Well, he’d likely not survive in the private sector. Then again, there are PR, marketing and sales jobs out there.
Perhaps “Buy Here Pay Here” used car lots.
PiperPaul,
As an ex marketing bod, take it from me, Mann wouldn’t last a day in the job. Marketing is about understanding, research and analysis.
Need I say more?
He’s not doing himself or his cause any favors by drawing such comparisons.
Holocaust exploitation for climate alarmism is quite common, Mosher did it here too.
Godwin’s law
Mann’s descent into unbelievable and undefendable hubris means that Godwin’s law is now meaningless.
In the words of Jules in Pulp Fiction: “ain’t the same ballpark, it ain’t the same league, it ain’t even the same sport.”
Manniac indeed, word and kook as well.
So having to endure a bit of valid scientific criticism can be equated to spending years in a concentration camp can it? Yeah right. Mikey the Martyr.
I would expect no less from a man that sees his fraudulent word crumbling around him.
It is written, Mann shall not live by dread alone, but by every word that procceedth out of the mouth of….clods….
“Michael Mann seems to think his personal distress…is comparable to the suffering of holocaust survivor”
Must be getting desparate Eric to concoct this sort of drivel.
The overwhelming, the vast majority agree with Mann.
tony mcleod:
No, you are NOT “the vast majority”. Even his colleagues regard him with contempt.
Richard
Really Richard? Which colleagues regard him with contempt?
Tony, you can find plenty of examples in the book: “A Disgrace To The Profession: The World’s Scientists, In Their Own Words, On Michael E Mann, His Hockey Stick And Their Damage To Science” . But then you already know that, as most trolls do know that which they won’t admit publicly.
“tony mcleod:
No, you are NOT “the vast majority”. ”
Perhaps tony is part of the “half-vast” majority?
Excellent Point to demonstrate your understanding of rational reasoning:
The majority of Nazi-Pscientists disagreed with Einstein.
Not overwhelmed here by his delusional fantasies.
Tony, where were the “overwhelming, the vast majority” when it came time to file third party amicus briefs in his defense in the case against steyn? not a single one of them showed up, yet numerous third party amicus briefs were filed on steyn’s side.
Go back to your hidey-hole, you delusional, lying troll.
As always, McClod has to invent support for his position.
Mann used the bloody quote, Eric just pointed in out. If most agree with him, why is he complaining of persecution, you make no sense at all.
Um, no he didn’t, have a closer look.
I just received my copy of Mark Steyn’s “A Disgrace to the Profession – The World’s Scientists in their Own Words on Michael E. Mann, His Hockey Stick, and Their Damage to Science.” If you want to support Mark in his legal defense against Mann’s pernicious SLAPP lawsuit, you can buy a copy from the SteinOnline website.
I should also mention that Mann is also suing Dr. Tim Ball a Canadian court in a similar SLAPP type lawsuit (though SLAPP is not a law in Canada). Dr. Ball, do you have a legal support donation mechanism? I’d kick in a few bucks to help your defense against Mann.
Needless to say, if anyone is suppressing others, trying to deny people their own opinions on the shoddiness of Mann’s work, it’s Mann himself.
“The overwhelming, the vast majority agree with Mann.”
And what’s your point? The vast majority like their mortgage paid and prestige.
tony mcleod
Are you referring to the 97%?
I’m no academic, but it only took me an hour of Googling to understand the fakiery of that claim.
I would post several credible links, but I doubt you would bother reading them, so I won’t bother posting them.
What exactly does Eric concoct?
• Mann’s public whining?
• Mann’s public blaming of others?
• Mann’s “everyone hates me” personal view of himself?
• Mann’s repeated insistence on using actual Holocaust horrors as basis for mann’s serial persecution complex?
Sure looks like manniacal concocted and is wallowing in his own problems.
Open scientific discussion would clear the air regarding cherry picked data,
bad mathematical formulae,
bad coding,
inappropriate statistics,
confirmation bias,
bias selected data inputs and bias assigned weightings, etc. etc.
Which is what open scientific discussion is supposed to accomplish; as opposed to the pal-review secret behind the scenes agreements ha allowed preferential treatment and overlooking bad scientific approaches.
Instead, insular refusals to openly discuss research, refusal to share all research in aid of independent experiment replication; To this date, there are zero independent replications of mann’s work. Every claimed replication required explicit mann assistance and selective use of program runs.
Which is to be expected when someone can even get the data groups aligned and oriented correctly.
pilt-down mann will be representative of the wrong way to conduct science for another hundred years.
It’s Eric’s opinion is that “Michael Mann seems to think his personal distress…is comparable to the suffering of holocaust survivor” – evidenced by the ”seem to think” bit. Yes, that right, he made it up.
No biggie, Eric is entitled to his opinion.
Not Eric’s opinion.
mann’s opinion, words, actions and deeds.
Note mann’s emotional attacks coming from undefined nefarious “fossil fuel” interests. mann’s opinion is that of insecure paranoid afraid of his future.
Typical t. clod handwaving while stuck in la brea tar pits…
Ol’Tony, grasping at pedantic straws, as usual.
If such pronouncements were made by some uneducated bigot, one could assume that Dr. Mann is simply a nutter, but coming from someone who is an ‘educator’ at a well known University, it is simply unforgivable.
For his own sake Dr. Mann could do himself a lot of good by visiting one of the concentration camps and in the light of the experience think again.
Actually “uneducated bigot” perfectly suits Mann, judging by past performances.
You highlight the difference between schooling and education.
“…..Express His Personal Angst.” I could apply the same line of thinking to Mark Steyn
You could, but you would be wrong.
Mann is trying to claim victim status, an old trick, but it is not working this time.
He’s done so many times before, claiming he is a “reluctant public figure.”
Ok, I know I’m treading water (with my little fingers) at this site when I claim Michael Mann is correct. But I must do so. He is absolutely right. Don’t think so? Let me repeat the words for you:
“I will borrow and adapt—for our current time and place—the words of Martin Niemöller, a prominent Protestant pastor who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler and spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in concentration camps:
….
….
Then they came for the scientists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a scientist.”
+`1
I saw that too.
Michael Mann admits that he is not a scientist!
He also admits environmentalist are not scientists because the scientists are already gone.
Never before have we witnessed science under the kind of assault it is being subject to right now in this country.
==============
true. there is an epidemic of false positives in science. across the disciplines, peer reviewed papers are found to be irreducible or just plain wrong when someone tries to recreate the results.
the public is the loser in this, because we pay for the science, we trust peer review to ensure we get our money’s worth, but the system is failing to deliver value.
but of course the scientists argue that everything is OK, we should just keep on throwing good money after bad. why would scientists want to correct a broken system, when their paycheck depends on not correcting the system.
“ why would scientists want to correct a broken system, when their paycheck depends on not correcting the system.”
Right you are, ferdberple, …… especially when one considers the fact that somewhere between 80% to 90+% of all currently employed scientists are entirely dependent upon government funding, in one way or the other, for their paychecks.
And if they even attempt to change the system there is a good possibility they will be “terminated”, ….. and there will be no non-government financed “science based” job opportunities for them to even apply for.
Most peer review is little more than spell checking.
And it’s not meant to be very much more than that. Other than gross errors (hey look! a perpetual motion machine!) peer review isn’t meant to validate the research.
MarkW
I’m sure you have seen the hoax ‘THE CONCEPTUAL PENIS AS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT’, but Matt Ridley does a nice demolition job of the peer review system in his recent Times article.
http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/mocking-gender-studies/
peer-review is about “ok for publication”.
Do they want a paper put up for public scientific discussion. !
Trouble is when the publishers DON’T WANT certain truths discussed, or want to push a certain agenda.