CREDIT
Patrick Mansell, Penn State
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Alarmism in action.
Extreme global weather is ‘the face of climate change’ says leading scientist
Exclusive: Prof Michael Mann declares the impacts of global warming are now ‘playing out in real-time’
The extreme heatwaves and wildfires wreaking havoc around the globe are “the face of climate change”, one of the world’s leading climate scientists has declared, with the impacts of global warming now “playing out in real time”.
…
Extreme weather has struck across Europe, from the Arctic Circle to Greece, and across the world, from North America to Japan. “This is the face of climate change,” said Prof Michael Mann, at Penn State University, and one the world’s most eminent climate scientists. “We literally would not have seen these extremes in the absence of climate change.”
“The impacts of climate change are no longer subtle,” he told the Guardian. “We are seeing them play out in real time and what is happening this summer is a perfect example of that.”
“We are seeing our predictions come true,” he said. “As a scientist that is reassuring, but as a citizen of planet Earth, it is very distressing to see that as it means we have not taken the necessary action.”
…
Where I live months of high humidity weather in the 90s or above is what we call “Summer”. But I understand such conditions are distressing for people who are not used to them.
Mann’s comments are not helpful. In his apparent eagerness to take advantage of the heatwave to promote his climate message, he’s gone too far. How can you scientifically state we “would not have seen these extremes in the absence of climate change?” on the basis of a claim that the probability of such events has doubled? A doubling of probability still leaves a substantial possibility that such events could occur naturally, without human help.
I am still waiting for Mann and all the rest to tell us what we did wrong that brought the last Ice Age upon us – and what we did right that made it go away…until they can do that I am not worried about the wonderful climate we have now even if it gets a degree or two warmer and fewer people die from cold and cold-related causes…
I assume that Mann uses the phrase, “climate change”, to mean “human-caused climate change”.
Otherwise, his statements would be even more idiotic, like:
We literally would not have seen dawn without the sun.
We literally would not have seen oceans without water.
We literally would not have seen our reflection without a mirror.
We literally would not have seen these extremes in fact twisting without climate-scientists’ derangement.
Excerpt interview “The Guardian”:
Prof Mann said that asking if climate change “causes” specific events is the wrong question: “The relevant question is: ‘Is climate change impacting these events and making them more extreme?’, and we can say with great confidence that it is.”
___________________________________________________
Again “we can say with great confidence that”
is the sole “evidence” for
“The extreme heatwaves and wildfires wreaking havoc around the globe are “the face of climate change.””
___________________________________________________
Don’t give that “Mann” that much publicity.
It’s hard to imagine why this person still has any credibility.
I am sorry all here, Mann is right: extremes are brought by climate change… Well, nothing new when the circulation changed from a slow mode to a rapid mode around the 1970s!
The catch 22 is that Mann labels CAGW as “climate change”… Thus he is, as usual, wrong and a propagandist to boot.
What about former Congressman Bob Inglis’s REPUBLIC EN?🤔
I bet Mann and Co are really fun to hang out with in July and Aug. Especially between 11AM and 4PM, dancing singing fun house of hysteria. It’s so hot he saw a robin take a worm with a pot holder.
In Britain, we had the same warm temperatures back in 1976 – long before people were fretting about CO2.
R
This kind of remark is a primary reason that I do not consider Mann to be a very good scientist. He (like James Hansen) has become an activist. All of us that do actual science know that there is a tremendous amount of judgement that goes into almost every scientific conclusion. When one becomes an activist instead of a scientist, that judgement becomes clouded by political concerns. The likely result is very poor science, as we have seen in main stream climatology.
would that be like the extreme weather event that caused the MWP to sit over the same small patch of the globe for 300+ years
What a crock of sh7t. It was not a “heatwave” or “climate change” that caused the Carr Fires, it was caused by… “The Carr Fire began Monday afternoon and was caused by a vehicle’s mechanical failure, Cal Fire reported.”
Let’s see if I can spin this… Someone was so hot, and their A/C was broken in the house, so they decided to get in their vehicle and fire up the A/C in there to get cool, and the vehicle, was so hot from being outside in the sun, that it misfired and caused the this fire, when someone started the vehicle…. yeah that must be it… gotta be, right?
Wonder if it was another EV battery pack going into runaway discharge.
Because he attributes everything that is happening to “climate change” and doesn’t distinguish between the two types of climate change–human-induced and natural variability– everything he says is nonsense. This what they are now reduced to: conflating human-induced climate change with natural variability in the atmosphere. So what he says is arguably true, but meaningless.
The Carr Wildfire is currently around 85,000 acres. The Tillamook Burn in Oregon in August, 1933 burned 350.000 acres.
I tend to trust the super-majority of scientists who study a particular science. For instance, I think chemists have this whole “stuff is made up of atoms” things correct.
When it comes to this particular science, why do many of you trust the non-scientisst over the climate scientist?
Alley
Isn’t it odd that, in climate “science”, those who favor and trust explicitly their government-paid, politically-connected and politically-funded government “scientists” absolutely as “pure and honest and ethical” regardless of their known moral failures and lack of ethics and absolute exaggerations and data manipulations and extrapolations, condemn so completely and vigorously ANY individual who disagrees with their politically-corrupt theory and money supply?
In the CAGW world of political money and power and influence and exposure at government-paid conferences, they condemn ANY person who uses private money or corporate money are claimed to be corrupt and their conclusions invalid, but those who take government money every day of every year are somehow innocent and honest.
Define a “climate scientist”
Michael Mann’s speciality, such as it is, is dendroclimatology. The super-majority of dendroclimatologists might have something interesting to say about that minor field — or not, since in Mann’s case his fame comes from application of statistics that a super-majority of experts statisticians are unlikely to support — but for most areas of climate science Mann is speaking as a layman, not an expert. And from some of his comments, like this one, he doesn’t sound like a particularly well-informed layman either, just a political advocate.
“Climate science” encompasses a wide variety of disciplines, and covers many areas where performing actual experiments isn’t even possible. Comparisons to chemistry and physics are marvelously inapt here. If “consensus” physicists told us that the average gravity on earth was between 10 and 30 meters per second squared, and had failed to narrow that range in decades of research, no honest physicist would claim the science was settled, and I could readily forgive iconoclasts who suggested based on empirical evidence that the true value was outside and lower than this range. If those same physicists went on to project terrible consequences (that somehow had not actually been observed anywhere) from gravity at the high range and to advocate public policy that was both expensive and ineffective to mitigate the effects, they would rightfully be considered as idiots speaking way outside of their expertise.
I recall a similar headline in the LIA Times?
I googled a list of the 25 Most Destructive Wildfires Ever Recorded. I don’t claim this is the Holy Grail but why am i not surprised that the vast majority are pre CAGW.
Can someone help me out here? When there are heatwaves in the summer I hear from “scientists” that this is climate change or global warming or whatever. But when the same areas get hit with brutal cold waves in the winter the same “scientists” say that there is a difference between climate and weather and that you deniers are too stupid to realize that. So which one is it?
My friend, I don’t know what ‘scientists’ you are listening to, but that is not what I hear is being said. Generally, the presentation is statistical – using the basic statistical principle of a normal distribution – and that the mean in this distribution is higher than previously. Also, the general notion is that there are more outliers (statistically speaking). It is not a single one here or there, there are just more extreme events. I think of it like any system – such as a car – when the car is running normally, the types of phenomena that one notices are pretty predictable. But if the car is aging, then that system will begin to show more and more anomalous phenomena such engine knocking, other unknown sounds, etc. That is the general idea.
Mann’s rat like close set eyes betray his vermin like nature.
That such a talentless incompetent hack that can’t even get a proxy series the right way up (how can you get it upside down in the first place?) can hold the position he does, explains all you need to know on the state of edu in the US. Sorry to say it, and there are infinitely more talented people shifting burgers at McDonalds
It’s funny that in the sub headline they say “scientists find”. They didn’t “find” anything. It’s nothing but unscientific assertions being gobbled up by those who either don’t know better or are willfully ignorant.
At this rate the jet stream is going to be discovered and a Nobel Prize will be awarded to an insider.
I’m just thankful he’s at Penn State. It’s fitting.
Absent his Grand Theft, egregiously phony “hockey stick”, no-one would ever have heard of Michael Mann (and absent socio-pathologic liars, the world would be a better place).
His stupid usage of the word ‘literally’ gives the show away. This is not a person – let alone a scientist- who should be taken seriously.
Weird….I keep getting told by AGW cultists that WEATHER does not equal CLIMATE. Funny that Mann thinks that it does.
Or is it that weather equals climate only when they think it supports their hypothesis?