Manntastic behavior on Twitter – harassment of Dr. Judith Curry by @michaelemann As you may know, both testified in congressional hearings this week. Mann apparently can’t tolerate a second opinion.
Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. calls out this petty and childish behavior.
Dr. Curry responds:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
When the time comes that Mann’s chicanery is being tested in front of a jury there will be a treasure trove of evidence out there on the web.
Is he still avoiding discovery in the Stein lawsuit? He seems to have much to hide.
No, but perhaps in the Steyn lawsuit.
Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists are cowering in their offices afraid to say anything for fear of retribution.
Have those climate scientists who were involved with the climategate gate emails been contact for an opportunity to rubbish Manns ‘facts’?
Over on Judith Curry’s blog, John Prince said this on June 28, 2019 at 7:37 am:
“Judith, don’t ever shy away from the facts. Congress is nothing but showboat politics. Per Roy Spencer’s remarks, Americans know politicians and journalists are far from the most powerful. When it comes time to argue in front of the most important thinkers in this country, the Supreme Court, then you will be taken more seriously.”
My response to his comment made on Climate Etc. was as follows:
The Supreme Court does not issue rulings on the validity of scientific theories, not directly anyway.
Rather, the court rules on questions concerning whether or not a government agency properly followed its own processes and procedures in reaching a scientific conclusion.
The court has ruled that the EPA has authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon GHG’s as pollutants. The court has also ruled that the EPA properly followed its own processes and procedures in publishing its CAA Section 202 Endangerment Finding for carbon.
A strong legal foundation is now in place which would allow the EPA to push the Clean Air Act to its absolute limits in regulating America’s carbon emissions — something which the EPA has so far chosen not to do.
The public debate over the validity of today’s climate science will not go critical mass unless and until the federal government begins imposing real personal sacrifice in the name of fighting climate change.
If and when that day comes, a truly consequential public debate which goes well beyond the political posturing and into the heart of the science will commence.
Every Congressional testimony we have seen and heard so far on either side of the scientific questions should be considered a practice exercise for the truly robust public debate that will occur if and when the federal government actually gets serious about regulating carbon.
“The public debate over the validity of today’s climate science will not go critical mass unless and until the federal government begins imposing real personal sacrifice in the name of fighting climate change.”
Wife, where did you put my Yellow Vest?
“Is there not a single climate scientist out there who will call this out as improper?”
Perhaps it is better to ask:
If a climate scientists says anything contrary to the climate crisis paradigm, and there is no media who will listen, does the scientist say anything at all?
There has never been a shortage of climate realists and those who will speak out against the Michael Mann’s of the world, but they are routinely ignored. Even in this short article there are three important contributors to the scientific debate who are condemning Mann’s testimony as false and his behaviour as horrible. There could be hundreds more, but who would ever know?
There are at least two ways to get a consensus. One is to find that a large majority of the people agree. The other is simply not county those who disagree and proclaim a consensus, which is exactly what we have in climate science.
One concept is that scientist’s retain their juvenile mammalian curiosity longer than the average. I will leave it to those knowing the subject, but do we (1) have too many who brought along the less valuable (avoiding the adage about cats getting killed) juvenile behaviors and (2) such leads to individuals with naive views that (3) allow such immaturity to be exploited? As the old song sings, maybe he (actually in the song she) is more to be pitied than censured, but (4) that doesn’t mean toleration.
#mannipulationofscience
I hereby declare Dr. Curry officially eMANNcipated after her testimony.
Penn State should not receive further climate grants until Dr. Mann is removed,
Can’t the EPA do that?
Is that Steyn court case still going? Something about he should be in the State Pen rather than Penn State.
Robert B: Go to Steyn online. Still going while at the same time dead in the water. In our courts, sometimes a lawsuit is like Schroedinger’s cat- both dead and alive.
I’ve written about the slimy tactics of the global warming thugs since 2005 or earlier. SSDD.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/04/14/hypothesis-radical-greens-are-the-great-killers-of-our-age/#comment-2688573
“The Left will be doing everything they can to shut down their voices. Their websites, their videos. Just watch.”
Radical greens have adopted and perverted Alinsky tactics (See Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”) to promote their extreme-left agenda.
The radical greens’ standard tactic is to never debate the scientific facts (when they do, they lose), falsely declare “the science is settled” in their favour (which is the opposite of the truth), and vilify anyone who opposes them.
Radical greens are abusers, liars and fraudsters – their global warming extremism is the greatest fraud, in dollar terms, in the history of humanity. Pass it on.
Regards, Allan
RULES FOR RADICALS: A PRAGMATIC PRIMER FOR REALISTIC RADICALS
is a 1971 book by community activist and writer Saul D. Alinsky
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals
1. “Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.”
2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people.”
3. “Whenever possible go outside the expertise of the enemy.”
4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”
8. “Keep the pressure on.”
9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
10. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.”
11. “If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside.”
12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”
13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
I don’t like to use the word and, as a result, rarely use it but there are times when no other word will suffice.
The simple fact of the matter is that Michael “Piltdown” Mann is an asshole.
Make that squared.
Has this man ever conducted anything with integrity or honesty?
I already posted a comment suggesting that the EPA not give any further grants to Penn State because of this man’s lack of integrity. Can’t the government refuse to conduct business with such an entity on that basis?
No further grants until he is removed.
I don’t want revenge. I want justice.
Calling on the liberal social media mob to go after Dr. Curry is as slimy as it gets.
You want justice? Here’s how:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/05/04/big-oil-goes-big-green/#comment-2695722
I suggest it is time for major push-back – since 2013 or earlier I’ve been advocating for Civil RICO lawsuits against wealthy institutions who benefitted from the global warming scam.
If anyone is seriously interested in funding this approach, contact me through my website.
Thanks Allan. We need more of this kind of thinking instead of the griping. Griping gets us nowhere.
For the first time in a long time, it was refreshing to actually see what the Republicans did in Oregon. In normal circumstances and faced with a PC issue the spine of the usual Republican is that of a jellyfish.
Allan has come up with a good thought. Let’s have more of it. “I’m mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore.”
Allan, do you know whether we could cut climate grants to Penn State.
CMay – hit them where it hurts – billions, even trillions of dollars of damages have been caused by warmists.
18 U.S. Code § 1964 – Civil remedies
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1964
prev | next
(a) The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations of section 1962 of this chapter by issuing appropriate orders, including, but not limited to: ordering any person to divest himself of any interest, direct or indirect, in any enterprise; imposing reasonable restrictions on the future activities or investments of any person, including, but not limited to, prohibiting any person from engaging in the same type of endeavor as the enterprise engaged in, the activities of which affect interstate or foreign commerce; or ordering dissolution or reorganization of any enterprise, making due provision for the rights of innocent persons.
(b) The Attorney General may institute proceedings under this section. Pending final determination thereof, the court may at any time enter such restraining orders or prohibitions, or take such other actions, including the acceptance of satisfactory performance bonds, as it shall deem proper.
(c) Any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962 of this chapter may sue therefor in any appropriate United States district court and shall recover threefold the damages he sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney’s fee, except that no person may rely upon any conduct that would have been actionable as fraud in the purchase or sale of securities to establish a violation of section 1962. The exception contained in the preceding sentence does not apply to an action against any person that is criminally convicted in connection with the fraud, in which case the statute of limitations shall start to run on the date on which the conviction becomes final.
(d) A final judgment or decree rendered in favor of the United States in any criminal proceeding brought by the United States under this chapter shall estop the defendant from denying the essential allegations of the criminal offense in any subsequent civil proceeding brought by the United States
You have convinced me Allan that this is possible. I like it for another reason and that it is usually the tactic of the progressives to run to the courts like the 9th circuit.
The potential problem is the establishment Republicans who do everything they can to keep conservatives from gaining power. Wasn’t it Bush who gave us the CFL bulb? He was no conservative.
What would we need something like Judicial Watch to see this through?
I still see the soft establishment Republicans as the problem. I do not think they would push this they are too weak and gutless. If they cross the Democrats they won’t be invited to the cocktail parties in Washington.
M. Man has gotten away with so much in silence from the Team. It has been almost entirely sceptics’ resistance to his roughshod methods or we would totally be snowed under by the worst operators in this meme- an inestimable debt to such as McIntyre, McKittrick, WUWT and a handful of others dedicated to keeping science as honest as possible, is owed by the entire world.
Release of the U of Arizona emails of Hughes, a co-author of the Hockey Stick, reveals the lengths hokeymann would go if unchecked. Hughes was troubled about his lead author’s plan of additional trickery (er… calculations) to tie modern obs to the only proxy that supported the “add on” of recent obs: the stripbark pine which had been flagged as unsuitable as a proxy by dendro professionals some time ago.
“I fear this would give a wonderful opportunity to those who would discredit the approach we used in MBH 1998 and 1999. They would almost certainly seize it to attack the use of the MBH99 reconstruction in the IPCC.”
This reveals Hughes and apparently Bradley weren’t going to go that far in the data manipulation (not exactly creditable but at least some vestiges of integrity were evident). This from WUWT half a year ago and worth a re-read.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/10/climategate-continues-first-look-at-the-mann-hughes-emails/
Wow. Mann makes some pretty mild comments and here we have a raft of seriously abusive and defamatory comments.
The lack of self-awareness here is a little frightening.
He has earned it, and more. Seriously, he deserves jail time for what he has done. He’s a disgrace as a human being, if he is indeed human.
Mann makes some pretty mild comments??? … like: “this myth about there having been a supposed hurricane drought”. You may choose to call that a pretty mild comment. I prefer to call it a lie.
John Dutton – I don’t think the appropriate comparison is between Michael Mann and the lowest commentators on a blog post. We should be looking at Michael Mann in regards to behaviors appropriate for someone worthy of esteem within the scientific community. He accuses Judith Curry of promoting various falsehoods and fallacies. The mildness of that accusation depends on the Nature of what Judith said. If she promoted numerous whoppers, that is a mild accusation. If she only has offered differing but supported perspectives, than it likely rises to the level of a vicious attack. I’m looking for the smoking gun of the first outright falsehood.
I don’t have experience in such, but it seems to me his blocking of Judith Curry from the critical hashtag #CurryCanards is unwarranted and unprofessional. This makes me think his criticisms were harsher than can be supported. Please, if you have the time and disagree, educate me as to how that is appropriate behavior on his part. Also, if Judith has ever blocked Dr. Mann, or others with any rumor of credibility I would appreciate any one letting me know that.
Mann has a long history of publicly denigrating/abusing colleagues and reasonable critics such as Judith Curry. He deserves everything he gets.
Where is Lloydo? Where is Stokes? Griff?
You jest like the trolls need to chime in there is enough trolling going on by MannFool. I don’t know why anyone gives the esteemed professor of my head is the size size on a planet the press. Ignore the pratt.
Michael Mann is fighting for his job; he doesn’t care.
Can you provide a source for the statement “Mann is fighting for his job?”
Mann’s behaviour is a sure sign of arrogance knowing the amount of money that is behind the global warming hoax.
Bwahahaha… Judith Curry is a joke. Nobody in the research community takes her even remotely seriously.
Sure. Uh huh. And just look at how many “in the research community” filed an amicus brief supporting Mann in the Steyn lawsuits.
Curry is a joke Mann isn’t laughing at. He fears her and others so blusters rather than refutes.
PS Quoting himself is not refuting.
Bruce, why don’t you identify yourself and where you fit in the research community?
At the University of Woolloomooloo, Bruce here teaches logical positivism, and is also in charge of the sheep dip.
Well we know that’s not true at all, Bruce.
But if it were, how much more damning of a statement could one make about the “research community” than that?
Either way, you’re clearly a fool and a troll.
Wasn’t too long ago that you claimed Dr. Curry was “not particularly well-respected.” You’ve really turned-up the rhetoric on her now. Get real.
Good read right here on how Dr. Curry is treated by Bruce and Mann cronies from a few years ago.
https://www.steynonline.com/7123/the-ugly-misogyny-of-big-climate
Bruce you beautiful useful idiot. Congrats! You are working for both sides now!
Bruce – where’s your data to support that claim about Dr. Curry? Climate science seems to be very selective in which data they accept and which data they ignore or discredit. Which as a researcher/environmental engineer – retired, I find very discomforting.
As the academics being to realise they are wrong – Mann is the kind of guy that not one person will have any reluctance pinning the blame for the failure on him.
Mike,
Pinning this on Mann will be equivalent to grabbing an eel while wearing boxing gloves. The media will guard him.
If you hit the eel on the head with a hammer first… Just sayin’.
Mike Mann is just trying to fit in at Penn State.
Mann was spotted sneaking out the back door of the building after his testimony.
(Initial reports that it was Jerry Brown were mistaken)
While appearing to act nonchalant, reports are they he was asking everyone if they had one of those bright red cylinder gizmos filled with carbon dioxide handy.
His pants were by then fully engulfed, having caught fire early in his testimony:
https://twitter.com/NickMcGinley1/status/1143579609218322432?s=20
I firmly believe that Michael Mann’s actions, words, and reactions must be viewed in the context of one suffering from acute Narcissistic Personality Disorder, as described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychiatry, Version V. Narcissists have an irresistible impulse and urgent need to attack and retaliate against anything or anyone who criticizes them or their work, or even those who give the appearance of criticism. I saw this firsthand when Dr. Mann complained about a humorous reference to termites and their methane production in a National Weather Service Area Forecast Discussion issued by an operational forecaster, and demanded that this kind of activity cease. This obsessive attention to his/their message of CAGW and any criticism of it screams of a narcissist lashing out at any attempt, even a humorous one, to cast doubt or aspersions on his/their thoughts, which he “knows” to be correct, as narcissists are never wrong, don’tcha know. Everyone else is wrong, but not the narcissist. Our classically narcissistic supervisor (not Dr. Mann) even told a group of assembled employees that he (our supervisor himself) was right, and everybody else was wrong. Further, he said that if we wanted to know what was wrong with our office, we should all go look in the mirror. Narcissists work extremely hard to control the dialogue and the narrative, and of course try to dominate any verbal conversation. Narcissism is a devastating psychological disorder, and deeply damaging to success in the workplace, especially in a government and/or public service setting; they are moreover a major detriment to a positive and healthy family environment. Narcissists are very clever and defy diagnosis, as they can use various methods to keep their opposition off guard. Lying is part of that. But, given enough time, their symptoms are there to put the pieces of a diagnosis together. These remarks are not made out of hate or political motivations or even disagreement on a scientific issue; they are made after observing horrifyingly similar and destructive behavior in another setting. It’s very possible that Dr. Mann would be a psychiatrist’s delight.
personally Id say pschycopath
I think Mannure Science is has a certain ring to it!
My father always said that “a wise man values even a fools thought”… somehow Mann’s comments don’t fit in that equation.
In debates on any subject, when one reduces to this kind of response usually indicates they have lost.
If there were any honest climate scientists left, they would be vocal in condemning the way Mann and those like him are discrediting the entire field and all who work in it.
Unfortunately, the honest climate scientists were driven out of the field by Mann and those like him a long time ago.