From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
By Paul Homewood
There’s nothing new about mainstream climate scientists conspiring to bury papers that throw doubt on catastrophic global warming.
The Climategate leaks showed co-compiler of the HadCRUT global temperature series Dr Phil Jones emailing Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann, July 8, 2004:
“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin [Trenberth, a colleague] and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”
Thanks to a science whistle-blower, there’s now documentation of a current exercise as bad as that captured in the Jones-Mann correspondence. This new and horrid saga – again involving Dr Mann – sets out to deplatform and destroy a peer-endorsed published paper by four Italian scientists. Their paper in European Physical Journal Plus is titled A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming and documents that extreme weather and related disasters are not generally increasing, contrary to the catastrophists feeding misinformation to the Guardian/ABC axis and other compliant media
.
Full story here.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The National Academy of Sciences—once a reputable, highly-respected organization—must be oh-so-proud that they elected Michael Mann as a member in 2020.
That they haven’t kicked him out since then speaks volumes about the current culture and status of the NAS, sadly.
Yet the trolls keep insisting that the fact that organizations like NAS endorse their views of climate science, proves they are right.
Unfortunately their co-conspirators in the media control the narrative so science has become one large circle jerk inside a hive minded bubble Political temple monkeys throw their shite at passers by and media then collect the shite and turn it into newsprint.
Marsha McNutt is a total incompetent.
I think Michael Mann had his Sir Cyril Burt moment in 1998, with the “hockey stick” paper. Going over the line from advocacy to advocacy backed with fabricated data. Whether he is delusional and sincere, or knowingly deceptive, I cannot tell.
I think he displays all the characteristics of a narcissist. They do not really differentiate between truth and fiction. What matters is the narrative and how much power it gives them to influence and be admired by other people.
It’s truth content is simply irrelevant.
You perpetrate the myth that Burt fabricated his data on twins. He did not.
Impossible correlation coefficients and mythical collaborators are just part of the scandal. Various people associated with The Bell Curve model tried to rehabilitate Burt, and it was mostly handwaving.
Reification of IQ was a major fault, as well as the model of “g”, of intelligence being a one dimensional real entity.
Those guys were eugenicists and racists. They invented statistical methods that could be used to “prove” their biases.
See: Bernoulli’s Fallacy: Statistical Illogic and the Crisis of Modern Science
By: Aubrey Clayton
Those ‘mythical collaborators’ were two females who had married since, taken the name of their husbands and moved to Australia. Gillespie simply don’t look good enough for them, which was convenient because it furthered his crusade against a scientist who was dead but had dared to suggest that intelligence was at least partly genetically determined instead of being a social construct so beloved by the left.
Ed, it looks to me that Cyril Burt conducted a valid twins study, but may have been sloppy in the writing of the report. Interestingly enough his finding was confirmed by the Minnesota Separated Twins Study (my twin brother and I were adopted but not separated, providing control for another study).
Reporting the same value of r to three places with the study size expanding several hundred percent fits any reasonable definition of “impossible”.
You’re correct, and we see the same problem with reported temperatures. Why did Cyril do this? It threw his study into doubt.
It was a very obvious fabrication, and he was not called on it during his life.
Michael Mann is still employed, and continues to get grants. So publishing a study where the algorithm produces hockey sticks out of red noise is of no consequence to Dr Mann.
“Whether he is delusional and sincere, or knowingly deceptive, I cannot tell.”
Mann conspired with Phil Jones to hide the truth. That’s being knowingly deceptive. He could also be delusional.
As for sincere: No, Mann is a deliberate liar. Jones, too. Reading their emails, there is no doubt they were pushing a human-caused climate change agenda.
They were not doing science, they were suppressing science. And it appears Mann is continuing with his attacks on real climate science.
The world should sue Mann and Jones and their Cabal for damages. Trillions of dollars of damages for spending money we don’t have on a climate crisis that does not exist. It only exists in the lies of Michael Mann and Phil Jones and their Crew.
Pay up, you lying bastards!
Well he is the founder/originator of the concept of ‘Mann Made Climate Change’.
Once we all accept that fundamental of climate study, then it follows that, everything he does since seems almost rational. When you have given birth to a monster you are duty bound to love it and nurture it. Even if the stick you introduced is beating you into submission, scientifically.
The puzzle for most of us, is why the global media support for the ugly construct i.e. Mann’s hypothesis, after it has been shown to be wrong?
“The puzzle for most of us, is why the global media support for the ugly construct i.e. Mann’s hypothesis, after it has been shown to be wrong?”
The only answer has to be politics. The climate alarmists/journalists want political control and CO2-phobia is their avenue.
“Science” McCarthyism has no constraints or media coverage at this point. Pick your AI assistant carefully going forward.
Maybe Republican leadership in the U.S. House can start a Committee to Investigate Climate Alarmism and Censorship of Science. I’d love to see the taxpayer-funded zealots like Mann grilled under oath in front of the cameras. I don’t see any European countries trading this on and the Democrats in the U.S. certainly won’t. American Republicans need to lead on this and reveal the ugly, tyrannical campaign going on in climate science to the world.
The Republicans should investigate all the IPCC “Summary for Policymakers” rewrites of the science conclusions in the IPCC reports.
The IPCC science reports said there was no evidence that humans were causing the climate to change.
But later, when the Summary for Policymakers was written, the summary said just the opposite of what the climate scientists had found, and claimed that there *was* evidence that humans were causing the Earth’s climate to change.
So the scientists who wrote the IPCC reports are lying, or the political activists who wrote the Summary for Policymakers is lying.
In the case of the latter, this lie has caused the expenditure of TRILLIONS of dollars to try to fix a CO2-caused climate crisis, that the science says does not exist, but the politicians at the IPCC say it does exist.
Vivek should look into this. It would be a very good talking point for him, and he is the kind of guy who can dig into this matter effectively.
The guy who changed the IPCC report has passed away, but that doesn’t change the fact that the IPCC report was changed from saying there is no evidence for human-derived CO2 causing the Earth’s climate to change, to saying just the opposite in the Summary for Policymakers.
It is a huge lie that has cost us trillions of dollars, and the mental anguish/illness of countless children and adults. It was, and is, a dispicable lie.
Vivek ought to hire himself a private detective company to look into all these distortions of reality coming from the politicians at the IPCC. Distortions of reality that are costing the West dearly.
The honest Republicans can be counted on one hand, while the rest only would investigate if they could use it to acrue power, fund raise and soak up lobbyists lucre. The Democrats are much worse. Serious investigations are no where to be found.
They don’t want too many people rooting around in closets. Who knows which skeletons will turn up!
To paraphrase Abe Lincoln, (no, not A. Blinken), investigations make a Congress critter more nervous than a long-tailed cat in a room full o’ rocking chairs!
It is far past time for those calling for Republicans to save the republic to wake up.
If you have not already figured out that the 2 party system, Demoplicans and Republicrats, in the U.S. is corrupted by the Ruling Class Elite you are a fool, and as Mark Twain astutely observed “It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.” Both parties owe their seats to the Davos Dandies who run the Global Board of Directors also known as the World Economic Forum. The politicians are puppets who turn the hard authority over to the the ruling class appointed Bureaucrats in the form of Omnibus Bills. That is not to say that all members of either party are corrupt. It is simple math. Wealth holders control enough seats from both parties to make their will be done.
“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin [Trenberth, a colleague] and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”
is this article how skepticism is done.
a. no background research.
b. no verification of the claims.
Well, its this simple.
if you see a WUWT title with the word science chances are 100% there will be a freshman error in the first paragrap.
“a freshman error in the first paragrap.”
mosh has to be toying with us.
It’s like the enhanced greenhouse effect actually. In theory it should work and most people assume it must be true, but the evidence is so uncertain.
I speak of course of the expectation that an English major would be capable of forming a complete, properly punctuated and capitalized English sentence, free of spelling and grammatical errors.
In Mosher World, it’s totally okay if people actively conspire to censor and misinform but didn’t succeed. Their tyrannical, anti-science behavior is excused.
BINGO!
Nothing to see here people! Move along!
Didn’t the Clintons claim no crime committed in Whitewater because no one profited?
If the crime didn’t profit, you must acquit!
As usual, a reply unrelated to the post or a blatant attempt at deflection. First off, the posted quote referred to “papers”, you refer only to one, what happened to the other? Second, no one said or even implied that the Jones cabal were successful in their corrupt activities, only that they made an attempt. The quote itself is factual. I do note that you are silent on the recent attempt at corrupt censorship.
Tried to shoot the messenger and missed.
Moosh shoots himself in the foot… Must have hurt his teeth !
Good thing moosh is always firing blanks !
Are you the same Steven Mosher co-authored
Mosher, Steven and Fuller, Thomas W, Climategate The CRUTape Letters, apparently self-published, 2010?
If so, you are familiar with the Jones E-Mail.
Others have pointed out the fallacies in your comment.
It is him and I have his book a good on too.
Before mosh converted to the one true faith of Climastrology, he was a notorious heretic. Now he must spend the rest of his life atoning for his sins by spouting incoherent gibberish.
Zeal of the convert
And the same one who tracked down Peter Gleick’s social engineering attack on the Heartland Institute.
“Are you the same Steven Mosher co-authored
Mosher, Steven and Fuller, Thomas W, Climategate The CRUTape Letters, apparently self-published, 2010?
If so, you are familiar with the Jones E-Mail.”
That’s Steven.
He wrote an excellent book that details the history of the temperature data mannipulators, and their efforts to distort the temperature record as a means of promoting human-caused/CO2-derived global warming/climate change.
Everyone who is interested in how we got here, should read this book.
Yes, Steven is very familiar with all the Climategate emails, and the situation.
I can’t explain his behavior in later years.
Yep, there is a freshman error in your first paragraph , moosh !!
We expect nothing other than errors from you.
In steve’s “mind” failure proves that no attempt was made.
The Jones said this was never in doubt.
If you see a Steve Mosher post, you will know that the post will contain:
Outrageous claims with no backing.
Serious violations of both logic and the scientific method
Insults towards anyone who fails to adhere to his ideology.
You forgot, the writing style of a particularly stupid 5 year old.
Or the last one! Please check read before posting
Does the fact that they failed to keep the paper out of print change anything about their conspiracy to do so in the first place?
If a person attacks another person with intent to kill, but the victim escapes, does that relieve the attacker of guilt?
Maybe Republican leadership in the U.S. House can start a Committee to Investigate Climate Alarmism and Censorship of Science. I’d love to see the taxpayer-funded zealots like Mann grilled under oath in front of the cameras. I don’t see any European countries trading this on and the Democrats in the U.S. certainly won’t. American Republicans need to lead on this and reveal to the world the ugly, tyrannical campaign of misinformation going on in climate science.
These people are evil.
Despite credible information ( on how weak the science of CAGW)leaking out of a every crack, leaky seam, flowing over and under and spilling out everywhere ,don’t expect the propagandists to give up anytime soon. It really is an integral part of their plan for world domination. ( that sounds ridiculous) Strangely I fear it is true.
They also have been doubling down on preparation for possibly a COVID like event. Twitter (X) seems to be rebuilding their censorship algorithms /policy’s and not for the better. So much for Elon saving free speech. What ever happens next a decision not to comply might have to be made. Very disturbing tell tale signs out there.
Mann really is a nasty arrogant little shit.
I have put the abstract on the wayback machine …
http://web.archive.org/web/20230825234039/https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022EPJP..137..112A/abstract?mc_cid=7f6b135e2e&mc_eid=4961da7cb1
… but I can’t save the whole paper.
Edit: The paper is already there:
http://web.archive.org/web/20220115000000*/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjp/s13360-021-02243-9
Don’t forget that the article was retracted because its asertions were not backed by any evidence. Instead of arguing about the minutiae of climate science, go outside and pay attention.
There are 3 sorts of people in the world;
Those that make things happen(that is the fossil fuel industry)
Those that let things happen (that is you lot)
Those who say, “shit, what happened” (that is you lot when the shit hits the fan)
Then there are those who don’t make things happen, but can’t stop them happening,
but will be prepared when they happen. (and I am not talking about a bunker stacked with cans of baked beans)
I thought there were 10 types of people:
Those who understand binary.
Those who don’t.
Yes indeed. Her claim that there are 11 is as illogical as her Climastrology.
Even worse, there are 100 categories on the list instead of 11.
False.
Did you actually read the full article linked above?
This paper was retracted due to pressure from the cabal of true believers whose mortgage payments depend on climate catastrophe being real.
Alimonti was asked to write an
erratumaddendum to update the paper to include references to AR6The third reviewer wrote:
Reviewer 4 wrote:
Excellent comment, Redge.
Comments like this are why I come to WUWT.
Somewhere in the discussion on any topic, you will find a good comment like this one.
What are you going on about, ninny? This summer has been completely unremarkable in terms of weather. I can remember many a summer night far more uncomfortable than any we’ve seen this year.
The only real anomaly has been the incessant screeching about any remote site’s slightly unusual weather, unless it be cold.
Yaaawwwnnnn
“Those that let things happen (that is you lot)”
Thanks Erin!
These are things that we WANT TO HAPPEN!
You like feeding humans, correct?
You like a booming biosphere and greening planet, correct?
You like less violent tornadoes correct?
You like less drought, correct?
You like climate optimums for most life on this planet, correct?
You would like life to have closer to the optimal level of CO2, correct?
Heat waves are 1 Deg. C warmer but cold still kills 10 times more humans and 200 times more life.
Sea levels are rising at just over 1 inch/decade.
“Those who say, “shit, what happened” (that is you lot when the shit hits the fan)”
Erin,
The more fake green energy we mandate/impose on society in the form of anti-environmental, shitty wind and batteries to get diffuse, unreliable, bird/bat/whale killing, landscape and ecosystem destroying (and Doppler radar interference) that tear up the earth for raw materials, that end up in the landfill 25 years later the more SHIT hits the fan defined with authentic laws of science, physics, energy and economics.
Your shit and fan are defined using political agenda, crony capitalism, corrupted science, misled, zealot/religious environmentalism and dishonest media.
Step back for a second and put on the critical thinking cap.
If CO2 is killing the planet, then why does it respond by massively greening up?
Observations always beat busted, too warm models using mathematical equations to TRY to project the future(which are political tools).
When models use the law of photosynthesis and observations, looky, looky what they come up with:
https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/146296/global-green-up-slows-warming
You do want that to happen, correct?
Of course Ken Rice, who initially wrote a suppository (sic), saying they shouldn’t use C14. but that disagrees with Yale Climate Connections.
https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2018/11/isotopes-point-to-the-culprit-behind-climate-change/
Mann’s complaints would go nowhere were not so many journal publishers moral cowards.
It’s amazing that a charlatan like Mann, whose major work (the bogus Hockey Stick) has been debunked over and over, has so much influence over publishers.
Or also on the gravy train
In traditional science, when the data/observations do not match the theory, you must look for a new theory.
In Climate science, if the data/observations do not match the theory, then you must seek new data/observations.
Story tip
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/08/26/the-eus-censorship-regime-is-about-to-go-global/
How is Mann even still viable? He has zero credibility yet he is like the energizer bunny and just keeps going. He is toxic even to his own supposed colleagues as evidenced when not a single one of them would file an affidavit on his behalf in his lawsuit against Mark Steyn. By the way, does anyone know whatever happened with that charade?
Can’t have this:
A critical assessment of extreme events trends in times of global warming
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022EPJP..137..112A/abstract
“This article reviews recent bibliography on time series of some extreme weather events and related response indicators in order to understand whether an increase in intensity and/or frequency is detectable. The most robust global changes in climate extremes are found in yearly values of heatwaves (number of days, maximum duration and cumulated heat), while global trends in heatwave intensity are not significant. Daily precipitation intensity and extreme precipitation frequency are stationary in the main part of the weather stations. Trend analysis of the time series of tropical cyclones show a substantial temporal invariance and the same is true for tornadoes in the USA. At the same time, the impact of warming on surface wind speed remains unclear. The analysis is then extended to some global response indicators of extreme meteorological events, namely natural disasters, floods, droughts, ecosystem productivity and yields of the four main crops (maize, rice, soybean and wheat). None of these response indicators show a clear positive trend of extreme events. In conclusion on the basis of observational data, the climate crisis that, according to many sources, we are experiencing today, is not evident yet. It would be nevertheless extremely important to define mitigation and adaptation strategies that take into account current trends.”
More accurately we could state that this is how non-scientists pretend to do science these days. Real science has nothing to do with hiding truths and stifling debate. That is the behaviour of cowards, fraudsters and miscreants.