Quote of the Week: dissing McIntyre on ‘mental health’ …backfires

From the “upside down Mann” department; something I missed while on holiday this summer. Steve McIntyre writes below about a climate scientist at USC, who goes a bit too far, and ends up looking stupid. Then again, Mann and questionable temperature proxies are involved, so such things tend to come with the territory when one tends to question “settled science”.


Julien Emile-Geay (JEG) submitted a lengthy comment concluding with the tasteless observation that “Steve’s mental health issues are beyond PAGES’s scope. Perhaps the CA tip jar pay for some therapy?”  – the sort of insult that is far too characteristic of activist climate science.  JEG seems to have been in such a hurry to make this insult that he didn’t bother getting his facts right.

JEG concluded his comment with a strange peroration accusing me of “continuing to whine about the lack of acknowledgement”, which he called a “delirium of persecution” and a “mental health issue”, suggesting “therapy”:

Continuing to whine about the lack of acknowledgement is beginning to sound like a delirium of persecution. We can certainly fix issues in the database, but Steve’s mental health issues are beyond PAGES’s scope. Perhaps the CA tip jar pay for some therapy?

Where did this come from?

I’ve objected from time to time about incidents in which climate scientists have appropriated commentary from Climate Audit without proper acknowledgement – in each case with cause.  I made no such complaint in the article criticized by JEG. Nowhere in the post is there any complaint about “lack of acknowledgement”, let alone anything that constitutes “continuing to whine about the lack of acknowledgement”.

The post factually and drily comments on the inventory of Arctic lake sediment proxies, correctly observing the very high “casualty rate” for supposed proxies:

This is a very high casualty rate given original assurances on the supposed carefulness of the original study. The casualty rate tended to be particularly high for series which had a high medieval or early portion (e.g. Haukadalsvatn, Blue Lake).

One should be able to make such comments without publicly-funded academics accusing one of having “mental health issues”, a “delirium of persecution” or requiring “therapy”.


Read the full story here (updated link)

One comment: From the bio of the USC website, Julien Emile-Geay looks to be yet another Mann-climate-clone proxy prognosticator, right down to the generic climate scientist “look” noted by our resident cartoonist Josh, and by claiming “climate change is the greatest scientific issue of our time” with a dash of saving the planet built into the mindset.

Julien Emile-Geay

Associate Professor of Earth Sciences

Contact Information (REDACTED BY wuwt)
xxxxxxxx
XXXXXXX

LINKS
Curriculum Vitae
Personal Website
LinkedEarth

Biographical Sketch

To a mathematical mind bent on understanding nature, climate dynamics strikes a perfect balance of mathematics, physics, chemistry, geology, biology, and social sciences. I am also convinced that climate change is the greatest scientific issue of our time, so applying one’s mind to the problem is not only fascinating, but also critical to the survival of civilization as we know it.
Advertisements

102 thoughts on “Quote of the Week: dissing McIntyre on ‘mental health’ …backfires

    • The panic and uncertainty will likely drive some of the less stable or brainwashed alarmists over the edge. Many are already in a state of denial and semi-hysteria. Self-delusion is unfortunate and powerful since it affects the ego. E.g., “I am important and a good person because I am saving the planet.”

    • “…. but also critical to the survival of civilization as we know it.”

      Oh my, mental health issues indeed! When one’s job is to save humanity I wonder to what length’s one will go, what brutality can be justified for the greater good? We’ve seen this before and this never ends well.

      He won’t just be lashing out, he will become very dangerous to himself and others – unfortunately many others are just as deluded with grandeur as he is.

      • Talk about psychological projection… We have a Whiner! And the Whiner is: Julien Emile-Geay!

        And then there’s this drivel: “…climate dynamics strikes a perfect balance of mathematics, physics, chemistry, geology, biology, and social sciences.”

        How do these witch doctors end up teaching science classes in our universities?

    • It is “climate scientists” such as this that set the bar so low for proper scientific endeavor that anyone with a belief system and a laptop can get on board. On the other hand they make real, skillful and honest scientists stand out like diamonds next to pig poop. Steve McIntyre is one of those diamonds.

    • Not to mention what seems to me to be just a touch of a messiah complex.

      There is a lot of it about though.

    • The comments from JEG are a form of misdirection known as “gaslighting”.
      When it works, it is a very effective way to silence someone.
      However, it is very unlikely to work on strong-minded people, those with good memories, those who pay attention to details and can enunciate them, and especially to material that is written down.
      This article is the correct approach, IMO: Shine on very bright light on people who pull this kind of crap, expose their half-witted shenanigans for all to see in a way which is public and will not go away.
      At some point in the future, perhaps the very near future, all of the warmistas and their alarmist brethren will be plainly exposed as the charlatans, fr@uds, and nitwitted jackasses that they are.
      The most well known of them will likely have their very names enshrined in the language foreverafter, as terms synonymous with all manner of words indicating ill-repute.

    • Actually I think the young gentleman and a lot of his generation are still in their nappies intellectually speaking. If they were not wearing the prescribed PC, CAGW nappies they would be thrown out of the Green Blob Pram and under the academic bus.

  1. Quote: Steve McIntyre writes below about a climate scientist at USC, that goes a bit too far, and ends up looking stupid.

    I’m having difficulty parsing this sentence. Is it meant to be able to be read without the part between the commas “Steve McIntyre writes below … , and ends up looking stupid” ie that Steve ends up looking stupid?

    Or “Steve McIntyre writes below about a climate scientist at USC who went a bit too far and ended up looking stupid” ie the climate scientist ended up looking stupid?

    It’s not entirely clear at first glance where Steve’s text begins.

    I think I get it now but I was puzzled for a while.

    • I was left wondering about this sentence, and concluded that a few words were left out during an edit or rewrite, as the two adverbs do not seem to be grammatically appropriate:

      “The post factually and drily comments on the inventory of Arctic lake sediment proxies, correctly observing the very high “casualty rate” for supposed proxies:”
      Or, perhaps the first word in the sentence should have been “He” or some such?

  2. His comments don’t sound at all like they are coming from a man with a mathematical mind bent on understanding nature. They sound like they come from the mind of a man bent on defending a paradigm that is mathematically indefensible, and will childishly proceed to call people names if they don’t go along with his way of thinking.

    If the planet or our civilization needed saving, I would hope that people more mature than Mr. Emile-Geay would show up to save it.

    • If Dr. (he has a Ph.D.) Emile-Geay is here to save the planet from us, who will save us from people like Dr. Emile-Geay?

    • Well, it has often been said “Cometh the hour, cometh the man”. I think we can safely deduce from the calibre of Emile-Geay and others that the hour has certainly not arrived yet, and we can still go about our daily lives as usual.

  3. He says his mind is “bent”. Interesting. Do tell. How vas your relationship with your father and mother?

  4. The mathematics of proxies may be wonderful, but the science is garbage. Not one of them isgrounded in physical theory. Every single proxy “temperature” time series is physically meaningless. Mathematics doesn’t change any of that.

    • Surely some are valuable for identifying general trends? For example the transition out of the last ice age is visible in ice core studies, I believe specifically oxygen isotope studies in Greenland.

  5. oh crap I have that same facial hair :( but thankfully a full head of hair on top … I think their lack of head hair (climate scientist standard) shows a lack of blood flow to the brain … supported by the evidence of their sloppy logic and poor scientific methods … correlation = causation … right ???

    • The should be a separate, distinct word for projection when it’s done intentionally to cause deception or misdirection in order to achieve personal gain. Is there one?

      • Much projection is autonomic, unconsciously seeing the Other through the lens of one’s own Shadow. The darker one’s Shadow, the more evil the Other appears. This is often denoted “psychological projection,” for clarity. Intentional attribution of evil to another is just plain old ad hominem argument, calumny, or defamation. The two often are associated and work in concert. The one who projects often can thereby sustain a belief in his/her own superiority, and then, based on that, feels worthy of calling the Other evil. Actually, the evil is entirely within the projector.

  6. A mathematical mind of Julien Emile-Geay is inexorably driven to making this planet a better place to live and work, by eliminating all opponents.

  7. This type of thinking really does speak to the poor quality of the individuals behind the CAGW game. I hope no one in his family or amongst his close friends ever suffers from depression or dementia. Believe me, it is difficult to deal with these issues in someone important to you, and it is not a joking matter.

  8. This would appear to be a direct result of the politicization of science. Because they generally only converse with like-minded scientists, individuals like JEG tend to reinforce their own biases (just as strongly as those with a dissenting viewpoint, btw). But when a scientist feels the need to lambast someone with a different opinion, it reflects on their own [lack of] character. I reckon the good prof. feels he’s doing one for the team and for the good of the planet.

    One hopes that after having put a few more years under his belt, he will become wiser.

  9. Julien Emile-Geay graduates from Ecole Normale Superieure de Paris, supposed to be the best of best college in France. Only the best in maths go there after a national test and students are even paid to attend their 3 year scholarship! (incredible but true, since when admitted to the school, they are considered as civil servants).
    So he undoubtedly has high QI and probably talent in some specialized field and could have been a productive and happy citizen. What a shame his brain is totally messed up and has devoted his life to being a taxpayers’ leech.

    • The government of France is trying to recruit climate activist/scientists TO France, and he is here, trying to peddle his wares in the U.S..

      The U.S. must not be so bad after all (or maybe it’s that France is a pretty sucky …?).

  10. I was having an interesting discussion about the weather with an associate professor of earth sciences only the other day while she was waiting for her farmer hubby looking at new utes (pickups).

  11. Contact Information (REDACTED BY wuwt)
    xxxxxxxx
    XXXXXXX

    LINKS
    Curriculum Vitae”

    So, you click on the CV to get the contact info? Why did you bother “REDACTED”

    [Because people like you invariably scream things like “Watts published his contact info and sent his minions to attack him!!!” You can get all his info with a Google search on his name, it comes up first, so he’s fully out there and easy to locate. But you can’t say the WUWT published his phone number and address. It’s his own fault and risk for putting that information in his CV, but his CV is fair game in the science discussion, since it’s on the USC website. I’m not responsible for stupid decisions on his part – Anthony]

    • Over the past decade of reading, my understanding is that Steve McIntyre has been mistreated by the academic and government folks that claim to be climate scientists. Sad. Sad. Very sad. [Trying here to sound like a Trump tweet.]

      On the other hand, I have read much that Steve has written since the “Ohio Paper” (2008 ?) and recall a time when Anthony and the WUWT crowd helped him (McIntyre) get back on-line after a computer crash. Many of us very much appreciate and acknowledge his contributions.

      Meanwhile, I have never heard of Julien Emile-Geay, until this post.

    • Mod. Sorry about the double post below. I lost focus when I saw Skeptical’s comment and meant to answer.

      RS,
      The reason he bothered is called “common courtesy.”
      Insofar as it is something you do not understand, perhaps you should look it up.

    • His CV doesn’t look in any way impressive to me. He has been, for most of his “working” life, an assistant.

  12. Over the past decade of reading, my understanding is that Steve McIntyre has been mistreated by the academic and government folks that claim to be climate scientists. Sad. Sad. Very sad. [Trying here to sound like a Trump tweet.]

    On the other hand, I have read much that Steve has written since the “Ohio Paper” (2008 ?) and recall a time when Anthony and the WUWT crowd helped him (McIntyre) get back on-line after a computer crash. Many of us very much appreciate and acknowledge his contributions.

    Meanwhile, I have never heard of Julien Emile-Geay, until this post.
    [ Self snip on the next Trump-like tweet..]

  13. To a mathematical mind bent on understanding nature, climate dynamics strikes a perfect balance of mathematics, physics, chemistry, geology, biology, and social sciences.

    It’s wonderful if you want to build castles in the sky. It’s such a fertile field for speculation.

    We can start with the fact that most published research findings are false. When we add social sciences into the mix we can add the fact that social scientists’ predictions are no better than those of a dart-throwing monkey. In other words, anyone who wants to dabble in all those things at the same time stands almost no chance of being right in any quantifiable way.

    No qualified psychiatrist would presume to make a diagnosis on such a flimsy basis.

    What we have here is an arrogant young pup who is really really really clueless. It’s actually quite painful to watch.

  14. Pick on Anthony? Ok maybe. Willis. Maybe. Some of the other posters here? Not sure. But Steve. Most people have enough sense to avoid poking the grizzly bear. His mind is so sharp he will spear this guy and leave him lying on the beach like the remains of seal half eaten by a great white. Clearly he has not read Climate Audit deeply.

  15. A co-worker (with a Master’s – which she made everyone aware of, who was going for her PhD – another fact she didn’t try to hide) once refused to speak to me for weeks after I pointed out that she had “hard coded” some spread sheet cells that she thought were formulae. All her answers she was providing to The Boss were wrong. For weeks.

    At least she didn’t say I had mental health issues, but she didn’t even thank me.

    Steve, et.al., will never be credited with finding the errors of his “betters”. They don’t make any obvious ones for their “lessers” to find…

  16. Saw this in real time at CA, still amazed at SM’s insult-free retort. Anyone interested should see the latest post (Oct 10) at CA, about hacking attribution. Brandon S. could not wait for the pixels to dry to launch one of his classic pointless attacks. Essentially, SM didn’t translate French accurately enough for BS (mon dieu!) and didn’t punctuate a quote with ellipses. BS did not say that these mistakes changed any substance, they were just so awful he couldn’t look at the substance. His loss, too, as the post was exploring the DNC hack (mis)attributed to Russia, very technical, something BS could have contributed, but he chose to insult and denigrate instead. Please see SM respond by lightly waiving off the gnat and getting back to substance. Isn’t it ironic that folks as intelligent as Julien and Brandon can’t see themselves in the mirror? On the substance, those who think “the Russians hacked the DNC” is yet another purposeful misdirection from the HRC camp will find some solace.

    • I saw a similar thing a couple of days ago in a comment thread on global warming. One commenter did nothing but attack grammer, spelling and anything else he could come up with except the substance of a comment. Maybe it’s part of the new “attack plan” found in the Troll Manual?

  17. “A perfect balance of mathematics, physics, chemistry, geology, biology, and social sciences” Combined with a total lack of reason, logic and common sense. Steve must have had breakfast before he read your comments. Lucky for you Julien Emile-Geay. By the way, I agree that your mind is mathematically bent.

  18. USC = University of Southern California, unless I am otherwise informed. SoCal’s various university campuses are hothouses of the CAGW type of mindset, with low tolerance for anyone who disagrees with the CAGW meme. I think most of us are aware of the utter nonsense that has taken place since the fall of 2016 at Berkeley, for example.

    All that aside, the real issue is not Mr. McIntyre’s mental state, nor is it even the rather egregious personal attacks on him by Mr. Emile-Geay, which were uncalled-for. The REAL issue is that anyone like Mr. McIntyre, whose opposing view may have validity to it, is a threat to the cash flow of these cranks. And yes, I will term JEG a crank, because he is following the weak, lame, poo-flinging trail of the CAGWers/SJWs/whatevers that want to rule the world and think they’ve found a way to do it. JEG doesn’t want to make a rebuttal. If he did, he would co so without flaming insults launched at McIntyre.

    The more I see of this, the more convinced I am that they KNOW, deep down inside, that they are completely wrong. If that were not so, they wouldn’t do or say these things, nor would they encourage such bad behavior. This is just utter childishness. You know it. I know it. And as I said, those CAGWers and their buddies know it, too.

    They do NOT have an argument. They have nothing but name-calling, insults, and when necessary, throwing things.

    • Right on Sara! I’m not a scientist and am old enough to have been around when dinossaurs were green lizards, we were all going to freeze to death and DNA was a crackpot idea. But one thing was always true. If I knew I was right , I welcomed a chance to debate those who disagreed because I could grind them to dust with my arguments. When I was learning about climate change , the first thing I noticed was that the alarmists, never debated the skeptics using ad hominem attacks instead. That was enough to tell me that while skeptics had the courage of their convictions the opposite was not true. They run from debate like squirrels run from coyotes.

      Someone ( Einstein? ) said, ” A theory cannot be proved, it can only be disproved.” A true scientist would be anxious to discuss his theory with those who disagree. Those with closed minds are not, in my humble opinion true scientists. What is true is the statement , “When someone says the science is settled, hold on to your wallet.” So to all you smart people, keep chasing those squirrels.

  19. I had a back and forth with him years ago when he wrote a piece praising Al Gore’s science, and criticizing Steve McIntyre. (you read that right, I’m not making this up) I emailed him, and got answer, doubling down. I eventually ended it, telling him I had worked with a number of top French mathematicians, finding them both brilliant and arrogant, and that he at least had one of the characteristics.

  20. I was born in New York City. I guess that gives me a fairly thick skin, and I’ve got to say that this is a mountain out of a molehill. I’m saddened that Mr McIntyre is upset by such a flimsy insult. But, really, is this the best they can do?

    • Sorry Retired_Engineer_Jim, I disagree.

      It’s very easy to upset and piss off New York urbanites.

      Especially when people who misunderstand the New York methods of interaction and negotiation imitate it by getting upset and yelling at them.

      I should know, I ticked off quite a few New Yorkers, before I learned to take it easy and smile when I was getting a face full and an earful.

      New Yorkers appear to be screaming at each other and just inches away from fisticuffs; except such discussions end as quickly as they begin and everyone goes to have Danish, corned beef sandwich, pizza, hoagie, lunch, coffee, dinner or just a drink together. Totally without evidence of any argument.

      It can be hard to learn not to take encounters personally just because the discussion is loud and nose to nose.

      • Yup. And on our most recent trip to the city, we found all the New Yorkers with whom we had any interaction to be downright pleasant. I couldn’t understand this – not a single John MacEnroe type to be found. One morning, I asked our waitress about this and she pointed out that school would get out the following week, and then the tourists would arrive. Apparently, New Yorkers don’t suffer tourists too well.

        I will, also, point out that I was born in New York a long time ago, before PC, 24-hour news anchored there, and snowflakes (the human type, we had plenty of the natural type.)

  21. Wow. it feels really GOOD to be “…applying one’s mind to the problem [is not only fascinating, but also] critical to the survival of civilization as we know it.”
    The man is a hero, give him a medal!
    I think this is the theme that lures these people to become so oblivious to facts and data: they are, after all, saving the world. Surely nothing should get in THAT way,

  22. JEG is a massive beta male, and part of the movement of pseudo scientists to erase the MWP because models cannot reproduce it with the CO2 levels of the MWP

    That is the driver for this junk posting as science

  23. JEG is activist first, and “scientist” second.

    That’s all you need to know, same as Hansen

  24. JEG is into “kissing the ground for Children” and Yoga and Yurts oh and science or something lol

  25. “They do NOT have an argument. They have nothing but name-calling, insults, and when necessary, throwing things.”

    Sara, remember what the poet Carl Sandburg, said, “If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell.”
    This applies to science as well as the law.

    • Excellent point, Jon Salmi!

      We will have to wear them down with facts that can be backed up with solid evidence – physically tangible stuff, if you will. It is the only way to put a stop to this nonsense.

  26. All the climate alarmist flat earth scientists are supposed to be good at maths but when they say the oceans are becoming more acidic it proves that they can’t even count to 14 or think that 8.1 is way less than 7.0 !

  27. The distilled essence of this matter is whether PAGES produced good science; and whether Steve McIntyre’s criticism of its efforts were good science.
    If you feel an urge to virtue signal to one party or another, read the science. Then you might be inclined to conclude that the PAGES science is terrible and that Steve McIntyre, as usual, was using good science to rebut poor science.
    Any arguments? Geoff.

  28. Like the implosion if Hollywood demonstrates, it seems our climate hypesters also project their issues.

  29. Remember that ad hominem “arguments”, such as the one made by JEG are a admission that Steve has won the argument. That person has no answer to the message so they must resort to attacking the messenger.

  30. Civilisation as he knows it has reliable electricity supplies, a large selection of non-local food in a convenient supermarket, a university enabling him to right the wrongs of the world and (as he is French) aircraft to enable him to travel in comfort between disparate locations (not a complete list).

    The typical CAGW advocate would have us eschew all of these things for intermittent electrical power, short-haul vehicles with long recharge times, no air travel, only food from the local area, hair shirts, etc.

    How is this ensuring “survival of civilization as we know it.”

    • Pretty sure they want to destroy civilization as we know it, John, not ensure it survives. Maurice Strong was very clear on that point.

  31. The article and comment thread where whiny insulting trollop, jeg masquerading as el nino, originally dropped his falsehoods and slime is https://climateaudit.org/2017/07/22/pages-2017-arctic-lake-sediments/.

    Obviously, el ninny nono jeg, takes social behavior lessons from Connolly.

    I hope Trump and Pruitt cancels any/all grants that eventually fund jeg el ninny nono.
    It would also be terrific if Pruitt and Trump have those grants evaluated for cost and value for services rendered.

  32. Can you provide a link to “the generic climate scientist “look” noted by our resident cartoonist Josh” ?

  33. Julian says
    ” I am also convinced that climate change is the greatest scientific issue of our time, so applying one’s mind to the problem is not only fascinating, but also critical to the survival of civilization as we know it.”

    My thought is that if he and his ilk get their way civilisation as I know it would be over!

    James Bull

  34. The only point I want to make on JEG is his bio where he lists:
    “climate dynamics strikes a perfect balance of mathematics, physics, chemistry, geology, biology, and social sciences.”

    (bold mine)

    Since when does naturally-occurring climate dynamics care about the social sciences? or matter?

    That he calls himself a mathematician studying climate dynamics he himself turns into a joke without realizing it. That right there identifies this cretin as a political-operator and hackivist, no science required. His professional work is undoubtedly sub-par and lacking in originality so that he can only attack successful mathematicians like Steve.

  35. Can somebody help? I’m at something of a loss trying to square “social sciences” with AGW. Or is there something I’ve missed?

Comments are closed.