From the “Manntastic claims require Manntastic evidence” department.
From the description:
The human eye could see the rise in sea level as the ice sheets in Greenland melt. Measurements also show a change in gravity as the ice melts. A new study has climate models showing the variation in ice sheet melts and how sea levels will rise so much, that low land across the globe is at risk.
Dr. Michael Mann joined Thom [Hartmann] to discuss how serious the rate of melt in Greenland and the evidence that the planet is in danger.
You’ll need a barf bag to watch.
h/t to CTM, who is recovering from surgery. We wish him the best.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Such a shame to think that the Obamas have wasted so many tens-of-millions of dollars on beachfront property.
+50
Bill Gates too:
https://www.realtor.com/news/celebrity-real-estate/bill-and-melinda-gates-purchase-beach-house-in-del-mar/
Where’d they get the money? Anyone know?
LOL, yeah, Barack and Michelle cannot be true believers.
All,
I guess that Dr Mann hasn’t kept up on the literature. My peer reviewed manuscript in the September
issue of the journal Dynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans mathematically proves that all current
global climate models are based on the wrong atmospheric dynamical system of equations and therefore cannot be relied on too produce any meaningful results. I repost my previous comment.
The only way any results from a climate model could be trusted are:
The continuum errors in both the dynamical and physical equations approximated by the model are smaller than the truncation errors of an accurate (almost convergent) numerical solution.
Now let us discuss each of these requirements in detail.
1. All current global climate models are approximating the wrong dynamical system (the hydrostatic system) of equations. This has been mathematically proved in my peer reviewed manuscript that appears in the September issue of the journal Dynamics of Atmospheres and Oceans and in another thread on this site (Structural Errors in Global Climate Models).
2. The physical equations are approximated by discontinuous parameterizations that have large continuum errors and that violate the necessary requirements that the continuum solution be expandable into a Tayor series. The necessary unrealistically large
dissipation needed to prevent the model from blowing up due to these discontinuities leads to a large continuum error and destroys the numerical accuracy as shown by the Browning, Hack, and Swarztrauber cited in the above manuscript.
3. As the requirements for a numerical method to converge to an accurate approximation of the continuum equations are violated,
the numerical solution will never be close to the true solution.
Jerry
Thanks, Jerry, fascinating stuff as usual. One small point. You say:
As my dad used to say, “Even a blind hog will find an acorn once in a while.” I would say:
“.. the numerical solution will only accidentally ever be close to the true solution.”
w.
(As a kid I thought my dad said “Even a blind hawk will find an acorn once in a while.” As a result, I spent a good chunk of my youth puzzled as to why a hawk would want to find an acorn, and what it would do if it did.)
Willis,
I had to wait 18 years to publish the manuscript until the “scientists” that kept gate keeping our manuscripts either retired or died. I was fortunate to find an Editor who is objective and honest and has no vested interests in climate modeling. The reviewers were open minded enough to see that the mathematical arguments are sound even though they prove that there have been major logical errors in the atmospheric sciences.
The IPCC can no longer making any claims based on climate models and if so, anyone can just point to the manuscript and have them state how they can obtain the “right” answer
when they have violated the basic principles of the Bounded Derivative Theory (BDT) and numerical analysis.
My only regret is that Heinz is not alive to be a coauthor on the manuscript given that the BDT he introduced was developed to resolve the mathematical issues with the hydrostatic
system used in all current global climate and weather models.
Jerry
As a former Commander in Chief of the US Navy, I would have thought Obama might has asked one of his admirable Admirals about the state of the oceans before purchase.
Well, he has.
I notice mann has his fiction books behind him in camera view….no, he’s not interested in money….he’s trying to save the planet. Hockey Puck needs to get his science correct first….CO2 is not a pollutant – it is a wonderful gas that plants need and we love plants because the plants make O2. Hockey Puck does not seem to understand simple things like there is no US climate – climate is worldwide. The US does not control worldwide CO2 – China, India, Indonesia, and many other countries control CO2 emissions. And, Hockey Puck, your cure is far worse than the alleged disease.
Never fear. The sea will not rise around the houses of the climate-savers. Surely, what Moses accomplished, Obama must be able to do also. There will be vertical walls of water, which will of course make the sea rise even more where the climate-wreckers live. This is climate justice, aye. By the time our emissions have caused all the ice to melt, Obama’s home will be surrounded by a waterwall hundreds of feet high. Grateful whales will lovingly look down on his roof terrace. Penguins will swim all the way from the Antarctic to shower him with votive gifts, small dead fish that they have caught all by themselves. Polar bears will come and offer their furs as rugs and doormats, with not even an envious glance at his icecube-machine. And sunshading will not be an issue anymore.
First time I’ve seen Mann speaking to camera as I missed the BBC’s travesty ‘Climate Change – The Facts’ . Blundering and unconvincing, even to believers.
Is he really wearing a little Adolf trimmed mustache there?
It’s funny, I was down at the sea this weekend and I said to myself: gee it seems a bit higher than last time I was here. Now I know why !!
I want the last 1:49 of my life back. SLR of 6-8 feet by 2100? An inch per year. No.
Mother Nature needs to step up her game if thats going to happen 😛
Whew! I am one mile from the Gulf of Mexico at an elevation of 13 feet so that means I won’t have to drive so far to go to the beach. Save on gas, or rather electricity.
I’m 200 miles from the Pacific Ocean and 1500 feet above sea level.
So even if I live longer than Methuselah I’m not worried.
And if I do go to the beach… I don’t like to boast about my athletic prowess, but I’m willing to bet that for as long as my toenails continue to grow faster than sea level rise… I can outrun it.
NOAA documents that global SLR has been in a LINEAR trend of 3.0 +/- 0.4 mm/year since 1993, based on satellite altimetry data from the TOPEX, Jason-1, Jason-2 and Jason-3 satellites.
Ref: https://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/socd/lsa/SeaLevelRise/LSA_SLR_timeseries.php
As you allude to, Mann’s absurd claim would require a 8-10 times higher rate of SLR if linearized over the next 80 years. Ain’t gonna happen . . . but then again, Mann won’t be around to apologize.
More and more climate change action is going to be enacted across the globe…that will be portrayed as having saved us and prevented the realization of those ridiculous projections.
Mann wouldn’t apologize anyhow.
Can you imagine the damage he would cause if he WAS still around?
“The human eye could see the rise in sea level as the ice sheets in Greenland melt.” Just looked at sea level, went the wrong way, maybe hasn’t reached the Gulf of Mexico yet. Maybe subliminal rise?
I dare anyone to stand by the water and claim they can see a 1/2 cm difference in the water level. Especially water that has surface movement.
But then I doubt that Mann has ever been to the waters edge.
Humans, with a 30 year life span 8,000 years ago were able to watch Doggerland submerge to form the North Sea.
There you go, confusing average with typical. Are you really thinking no one reached age 15 with their parents still living?
Of course not, don’t be so patronising
I thing it may depend on the tidal. Sometime you can see that the sea is rising up, sometime it is the opposite. But in all cases it is alarming.
Anthony writes, “You’ll need a barf bag to watch.”
I’ll skip watching it because I prefer not to barf…though I did enjoy the character Barf in “Spaceballs”
Stay safe and healthy, all.
Regards,
Bob
Is there a way to direct all that water to Hollywood?
They would not recognize it.
To Hollywood, water comes effervescent from bottles or sparkling clear and properly warm from plated taps.
From the hungry polar bears department. A couple of days ago there was a news report from Newfoundland.
Seems during an ‘exercise’ the army left their shiny orange search and rescue helicopter unattended. A polar bear tried to get in and broke windows and scratched it up.
Mann, if you look close enough (not pleasant of course)- seems to have a 2 day old Hitler mustache.
Good Lord. The constant scaremongering about, ooowww, scary sea-level(!), is so tiring. Find something else that at least would be plausibly scary. How ’bout a coming marxist takeover of world governments and subsequent loss of freedom? That’s actually very scary…..
Yes indeed. Is the Marxist takeover that really scares me. Waffling along about Mann’s duff comments dressed up as science is just a waste of time.
Lot of Nonsense: “Unprecedented in 12 thousand years”
Mickey you are a …. your pants are on fire, and not from the global heating, global warming is soooo passe
“Unprecedented in 12 thousand years”?
Twelve thousand years ago, where I am sitting now
was buried under three hundred feet of ice.
The ice is not there (here) now.
So it’s hardly unprecedented. Is it?
It’s not a lie …. if you believe it
& Green Lies Matter – GLM
Concur.
Sounds just like the guests on “coast to coast” warning us about hostile UFOs, Fukushima killing the ocean, viruses killing us, planet Niburu on kollision course with earth etc, etc. Climate conspiracy stuff.
Mann: “…decades ahead of what we were predicting…”
1 – So you admit climate models don’t work?
2 – I thought models were scenarios not predictions, so what you are saying is climate model predictions are wrong
“They use climate models to estimate…” And there it is, models all the way down. “It’s another hockey stick…” Bwahahahah! At least he’s consistent. 😉
Astronomers don’t use model to determine how far away a star is- or how big it is- or how old- or how fast it’s moving- they use SCIENCE.
Actually, they use proxy measurements based on untestable hypotheses.
Mann or a mouse?
Mann: “The human eye could see the rise in sea level as the ice sheets in Greenland melt.”
In certain areas of the coast, particularly during the new or full moon, sea level can rise or fall by 2 meters or more in 6 hours between high and low tide (a rate of about 5.6 mm per minute). On top of that, how is anyone supposed to notice with the naked eye a sea level rise rate of 2 millimeters per year (about 3.8 * 10^-6 mm per minute)?
Steve Z
That will happen when Johanna and Johnny Polar Bear can fly helicopters for example from Aéroport de Nice to St Tropez…(Swedish upper class lingo: “Ta helin till Troppan…”) First time I left Nice by plane end of March 2016, there were a couple of V22 Osprey at the end of the airport. Great machines….
Not being one of DJT:s most ardent supporters I hope gets well…soon…
Best wishes to Charles the Moderator (CtM) to get well soon. But Charles, please don’t watch this video. You need to rest, not aggravate yourself. Unless watching Michael Mann practice his sophistry amuses you, of course.
Thanks.
Best wishes, Charles. Long life and prosperity. 🙂
Also, we need you around here.
And from Geoff in Melbourne, Charles.
“h/t to CTM, who is recovering from surgery. ”
Wow, was the video that bad? 😉
Oceans could rise a foot before all of his books on his shelves are sold.
Only if he and his family members buys the rest of them.
This is the first time I’ve seen this clown in action. Wow!
Where’s his data that says natural factors cannot account for the warming.
How does he explain NASA and NOAA fudging number to make the past look cooler?
Where’s the source code and raw data for his Commodore 64 models?
The problem with using changes in gravity to measure changes in ice amounts, is that ice isn’t the only thing that changes. Isostatic rebound influences gravity. Magma moves around, influencing gravity.
They claim that they are adjusting for such factors. However, as I have always said, when your changes are larger, much less 10 times larger, than the signal you claim to have found, then you haven’t really found anything.
The weight I gained over the ‘rona house arrest increased my gravitational field – which increased the pull between my mass and the moon.
The moon now has a greater gravitational pull to me – and oceans – so I’m partly to blame.
Not 20 ft, not 2-3 mm ,probably something like 2*10^-37m
Micky Mann is a pathological liar. And one of his many ways of lying, a favorite of many of his ilk, is to use a meaningless factoid, which on the surface, sounds good, but is actually pure junk science meant to persuade, mainly by using fear. Take for example, his factoid about the amount of ice melting in July two summers ago. Anyone with half a brain could quickly figure out that if you wanted to pick a month to showcase melting ice, you probably couldn’t do much better than July. He then uses a trick, another form of lying, using a red herring: that the amount of ice which melted (and we’ll assume the amount is true, although with PantsonFire, you never know) would raise SL by 1/2 cm, or about 3/16 inch. And yes, of course the human eye can see 3/16 inch. But so what? How much of that icemelt actually wound up in the ocean? I would wager that much of it stayed in place, and simply re-froze. And when ice rebuilds in colder months, there are likely times when the amount of ice forming during that month would equal that which melted that July. Using his idiotic red herring, we could also see that 3/16 inch subsequent drop in SL.
Mannsplaining.
Oh, very good!
+ 97%
Michael Mann can make any claim he likes about the Greenland Ice Sheets and what sea level will be 80 years from now because, he’ll be long dead and most of the people who watched his dumb-ass interview will be dead as well, and no one will give a crap what he said and when he said it. He knows his claims are BS, but, he has to keep making BS claims in order to satisfy his need to feel important.
Max P
+100
He lost all credibility with his fraudulent hockey stock graph.
Mikey is in disguise.He has swapped his signature Homer Simpson – ish goatee and moustache for Hitler Tache
Maybe Weight Watchers could make use of this video. Whenever you want to barf…should mean less calories get digested. This is a low tech version of yelling fire in a crowed theatre. Michael Mann et al should be prosecuted under the Data Quality Act for lying about all his antics to whip up panic about human caused climate change. This latest claim could be shown to be patently false, just like his hockey stick. Really disgusting that other academics don’t call him out for his outrageous behaviour.
The “Planet” is in danger? REALLY? I am pretty sure that if 100 feet of brand new water from outer space rained down upon the Earth that the planet would survive just fine. The Planet doesn’t care if it’s dry or wet. How careless can a PhD. be in the use of their language?
Worst case is that people living in low areas would have to adapt over 100 years. Humans have been adapting foe at least tens of thousands of years – more depending on what you call Human. Much of the City of New Orleans is already under sea level, but lo and behold people still live there! (Not arguing they should be living there, just observing they do).