Had a bit of insomnia tonight (from falling asleep early), and this popped up in my message stream on Facebook. I didn’t expect to post again so soon, but his deserved airing.
Michael Mann:
There’s a big asymmetry in the public conversation. Scientists live by a covenant to be truthful, to be skeptical in an honest way, stating the caveats and uncertainties, and yet we’re often in battle with climate change deniers who don’t play by those rules.
Noble cause corruption is corruption caused by the adherence to a teleological ethical system, suggesting that people will use unethical or illegal means to attain desirable goals, a result which appears to benefit the greater good. Where traditional corruption is defined by personal gain, noble cause corruptions forms when someone is convinced of their righteousness, and will do anything within their powers to achieve the desired result. An example of noble cause corruption is police misconduct “committed in the name of good ends” or neglect of due process through “a moral commitment to make the world a safer place to live.”
See also: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
Abstract
There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research.
See also “climategate”
From: Phil Jones. Nov 16, 1999
“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature [the science journal] trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”
From Phil Jones To: Michael Mann (Pennsylvania State University). July 8, 2004“
I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”
From Phil Jones. To: Michael Mann. Date: May 29, 2008
“Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise.”
From: Michael Mann. To: Phil Jones and Gabi Hegerl (University of Edinburgh). Date: Aug 10, 2004
“Phil and I are likely to have to respond to more crap criticisms from the idiots in the near future.”
Yes there is a “covenant” among climate scientists for certain, it’s just not the same covenant Dr. Mann thinks it is.
Yeah right…..
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/07/04/epa-funded-lab-faked-research-results-on-respiratory-illnesses-whistleblower-lawsuit-claims.html
And the mortal gods said: let there be a political/social consensus.
Maybe, but his “pants are on fire”.
“Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise.”
I cheerfully admit to being over my head about much of the sciency stuff here.
But I was a civil servant responsible for fulfilling Freedom of Information (FOI) requests for many years, and if I ever saw such an admission from anyone, including my superiors, I would have availed myself of the “whistle blower” provisions in the law and dropped a dime on them.
Counselling the destruction of official records is as bad as actually deleting them.
That these guys were “exonerated” as opposed to being fired and/or jailed tells you everything you need to know about the veracity of the “investigation”.
And the ethics of the institution.
Covenant to a conspiracy maybe–see Brazil if you have any questions
Russian origins of AGW activism: http://www.trevorloudon.com/2017/06/why-the-russians-conceived-the-global-warming-scam/
Projection and double think. The warmists have increased their use of appropriating skeptic arguments and pretending the arguments are their own. It’s like the kid that stole a bike and then claims everyone else stole a bike, but not him. You see it in comment sections discussing global warming, too. It’s the belief that if they use the same statements skeptics do, people are stupid enough to fall for this. They may be right. I don’t know. But comment sections are full of examples—pretending to be rational and using the arguments skeptics did as thier own. Suddenly, warmists speak exactly like skeptics. A rational person would realize that means the skeptics have the strongest position—no one copies the weak position.
Stephen Schneider certainly didn’t see any covenant. He said climate scientists made up scary scenarios to draw attention.
The thing about a guy like Mann is true of all hypocrites – pointing it out to them doesn’t do any good – by the very definition of their character, being a hypocrite doesn’t bother them, or they wouldn’t be one in the first place.
This guy was EXTREMELY lucky Obama was in power when Climategate broke.
https://www.psychopathfree.com/articles/why-do-psychopaths-put-us-on-the-defense.146/
That link says everything you need..
Disclaimer: I am in no way defaming, libeling, offending the delicate sensitivities, nor associating Mann with psychopathic behavior. The link about psychopathic projection on an article about Mann is purely coincidental.
I think Mann used emotional truth there when speaking…
To me (nobody special), the whole speech there is riddled with what I see as rather obvious con-artistry, which leaves me (again) rather sure we’re dealing with a large scale “psyop” (psychological operation), designed to exploit the general public’s susceptibility to “authority worship”.
“Scientists, for lack of a better word, live by a covenant … ”
This sort of all encompassing “WE are the good guys” rhetoric (spoken as though getting a degree in a scientific realm is effectively impossible for unethical or corruptible people to achieve), is a “tell” to me, which is to say a sign that I might be listening to a con-artist, under any circumstances, but when potential corruption is the central question at hand, the “might be” becomes a “most likely”.
“… (yada yada yada), and yet we’re often in battle with a group of individuals …”
A mere “group of individuals” . . unlike “scientists” in this spiel . .
“… I call climate change contrarians, or climate change deniers, because they are literally denying what the science has to say …”
It’s all psyop double-talk there (to me), since virtually no one denies “climate change”, and “the science” can’t say squat . . The terms are being used in a “shorthand” sort of way, and it works wonderfully, because too many CAGW skeptics have allowed it to go unquestioned, or even joined in the brainwashing by adopting the nonsensical usages themselves.
Wake up honest scientists, I suggest, and quit allowing shady lingo like that to go unchallenged, at any time, by any speaker . . or you will awaken to a “technocratic dictatorship” one day soon, which exploits that (somewhat flattering) talk talk to erect a virtual god, which cannot be challenged. (The “like Holocaust deniers” aspect is nothing more than a simple trick, I say, to keep you from recognizing all the Siants God erecting con-artistry for what it is . . )
Mann will have to account to the Judge for his words.
Matthew 12:36 http://biblehub.com/matthew/12-36.htm
Scientists live by the same covenant as priests, politicians, and used-car salesmen. Self-worship is always an ugly thing to see.
He has a lot of nerve to promise that scientists are uniquely objective, with the climate email leaks right there for anyone to read. Thanks AW for that little foil to contrast present statements with past behavior.
But he has a lot more nerve to complain about “big asymmetry” when billions of taxpayer dollars are wasted on “the cause,” and billions of dollars in expensive weather-dependent wind and solar projects are mandated, and trillions in “climate debt are claimed, and a price on carbon would promise a world wide tax bringing in billions.
Despite the asymmetry, the smaller half just elected a president, a house, a senate, & a majority of govs, and the President is now in Poland announcing the Three Seas Initiative, to update the infrastructure and offer competing gas to Eastern Europe. Just not playing by the rules the climate scientists laid down.
Anthony Watts
There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false.
Really Anthony? Is that based on a ‘feeling’ you have? Or maybe it’s based on someone else’s ‘feelings’.
It’s certainly not actually based on evidence is it?
Tony,
There are a number of scholarly studies on this subject if you care to look and read. The subject has been discussed at various blogs including Judith Curry’s. But I doubt that you will view anything that tarnishes your noble scientists and their “gold standard” peer review.
A quick web search supports the claim. The one I liked best of the large listing available is at: https://www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2013/sep/17/scientific-studies-wrong
Proves that even the Guardian can find the acorn of truth occasionally.
Inventor Of Fraudulent Temperature ‘Hockey Stick’ Is Humiliated In Canadian Court
https://www.technocracy.news/index.php/2017/07/04/fatal-courtroom-act-ruins-michael-hockey-stick-mann/
Reply: This originates from a source few of us trust ~ctm
Mann and his so far unindicted coconspirator CACA enemies of humanity must be dragged before the bar of justice, or science is finished. Mankind will survive their assault on us.
Mann is the very antithesis of a covenanter of truth. His hockey stick is a trick and pack of lies. He and his fellow ringleaders in mass murder of tens of millions and the theft of tens of trillions must be made to pay.
Another crazy bit of pontificating from “Father Michael” Mann of the Church of Climate Righteousness. He’s almost a clown-like character who looks more like he’s from the State Pen and not Penn State.
If there were a God or even human justice, that’s where the data molester would be. With child molester Jerry Sandusky.
While Mann should be fired for academic dishonesty and falsified data, his video posted is quite interesting from a psychological point of view. Often, when people criticize others, what they often unconsciously do is actually criticizing aspects of their own personality which they deny or do not like. Listen to his words, it is all really about him when speaking about the other side being deniers. He is a documented scientific fraud, University does not care if he brings in research grant money. I would never send my kid to Penn State. He is worthy of being a subject for psychology studies. Besides vid, he also acted like kid idiot when testifying to Congress recently amount other real scientists. He is a psychopathic liar.
I hope the Canadian Courts who just found Mann in contempt of court by not releasing data for his own libel lawsuit also allow a large compensatory judgement against him for the unjustly accused defendants who spoke the truth about this scientific criminal who contributed to $ billions in taxpayer money being wasted on AGW which does not exist except for Mann (and Gavin Schmidt) made up data.
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/michael-mann-refuses-to-surrender-data-to-court-contempt.310965/
https://bwi.forums.rivals.com/threads/michael-manns-potential-contempt-of-court.177465/
I may be wrong but doesn’t that data MM refuses to part with, belong to the American people?
Man, he’s got one of those faces…..punchable.
Also his eyes are too close together and you know what they say about that….You can’t trust people with close-set eyes (i.e. GW Bush).
Less than 600 views on Youtube . . . . .
Isn’t it odd that the people we are most willing to trust are being honest in what they say are the the ones who have admitted they were wrong about something?
Mann vs. Race Girl, a thought experiment:
If I crash my dragster at 300 MPH to a Mann, will the momentum be conserved or kinetic energy dissipate as heat?
http://www.goracegirl.com/images/racegirl-dragster-seattle.jpg
Our big problem with Mann and the IPCC is that the road to hell is paved with good intentions
There are no good intentions involved here at all. Their solitary intent is to steal as much money as possible.