Slashdot Mirror
Michael Mann: Swiftboating Comes To Science
Lasrick writes: Michael Mann writes about the ad hominem attacks on scientists, especially climate scientists, that have become much more frequent over the last few decades. Mann should know: his work as a postdoc on the famed "hockey stick" graph led him to be vilified by Fox News and in the Wall Street Journal. Wealthy interests such as the Scaife Foundation and Koch Industries pressured Penn State University to fire him (they didn't). Right-wing elected officials attempted to have Mann's personal records and emails (and those of other climate scientists) subpoenaed and tried to have the "hockey stick" discredited in the media, despite the fact that the National Academy of Sciences reaffirmed the work, and that subsequent reports of the IPCC and the most recent peerreviewed research corroborates it.
Even worse, Mann and his family were targets of death threats. Despite (or perhaps because of) the well-funded and ubiquitous attacks, Mann believes that flat-out climate change denialism is losing favor with the public, and he lays out how and why scientists should engage and not retreat to their labs to conduct research far from the public eye. "We scientists must hold ourselves to a higher standard than the deniers-for-hire. We must be honest as we convey the threat posed by climate change to the public. But we must also be effective. The stakes are simply too great for us to fail to communicate the risks of inaction. The good news is that scientists have truth on their side, and truth will ultimately win out."
Even worse, Mann and his family were targets of death threats. Despite (or perhaps because of) the well-funded and ubiquitous attacks, Mann believes that flat-out climate change denialism is losing favor with the public, and he lays out how and why scientists should engage and not retreat to their labs to conduct research far from the public eye. "We scientists must hold ourselves to a higher standard than the deniers-for-hire. We must be honest as we convey the threat posed by climate change to the public. But we must also be effective. The stakes are simply too great for us to fail to communicate the risks of inaction. The good news is that scientists have truth on their side, and truth will ultimately win out."
Because
[x] Fox News
[x] the Wall Street Journal
[x] Wealthy interests
[x] Koch Industries
[x] Right-wing elected officials
[x] well-funded
[x] climate change denialism
[x] deniers-for-hire
Attention zealots and haters: 00100 00100
This kind of shit belongs on DailyKos or Politico, but not on Slashdot.
Isn't the warming, sea level rise, and melting of ice verification? If not, what evidence could posisbly convince you?
What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
Steyn compared Mann to a notorious pedophile. Steyn is a vile asshole.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
This is funny. Michael E Mann is the master of the personal attack and he is a proven liar.
As far as the attack go, go read his twitter account for a bit. According to Mann, anyone who disagrees with him is 'anti-science', in the pay of big oil or a serial disinformer. Mann routinely insults anyone he that disagrees with him in anyway.
Michael E Mann:
On the other hand, serial climate disinformer Judith Curry, in a commentary for the same outlet five days later, announced, "Consensus distorts the climate picture."
Link http://www.livescience.com/39957-climate-change-deniers-must-stop-distorting-the-evidence.html
Judith Curry: Professor and former Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology and President (co-owner) of Climate Forecast Applications Network (CFAN). I received a Ph.D. in Geophysical Sciences from the University of Chicago in 1982. Prior to joining the faculty at Georgia Tech, I held faculty positions at the University of Colorado, Penn State University and Purdue University. I currently serve on the DOE Biological and Environmental Science Advisory Committee, and have recently served on the NASA Advisory Council Earth Science Subcommittee, National Academies Climate Research Committee and the Space Studies Board, and the NOAA Climate Working Group. I am a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the American Geophysical Union..
Currys sin? Well, she doesn't believe that climate change will be as bad as Mann thinks. Curry is a lukewarmer.
There is more, but frankly reading Mann's tweets makes me want to shower. The man is a hate filled ass.
As far as lying goes, well Mann claimed to have won a Nobel Prize. He didn't, he did however get a fancy certificate (along with a few hundred other people) from the Nobel committee. Even after he was informed that he *did not* win a Nobel Prize from the actual Nobel Prize committee, Mann included the actually-not-a-fact of his Nobel Prize in a lawsuit against Mark Steyn. Thats right. After being informed that he didn't win a Nobel Prize, Mann sued in federal court and claimed to be a Nobel Prize winner and part of the original suit was 'defamation of a Nobel Prize Winner'.
Additionally, Mann routinely lies about his hockey stick in that he claims the hockey stick was exonerated by numerous investigations. However, the invstigations he cites did not investigate the hockey stick.
http://climateaudit.org/2014/02/21/mann-and-the-muir-russell-inquiry-1/
Regardless of where you stand on the climate change debate, Mann is dishonest. He routinely lies. He routinely insults anyone who disagrees with him. And there are serious questions about his science, mainly his mathmatical methodology.
You have not been looking hard enough if you havent found skeptics elsewhere than in the US.
If you think the scientific debate on global warming has ended in countries like the UK, Australia, Canada, all European countries and elsewhere, you are actively trying to silence the debate.
For example, we've still yet to figure out why the periods with higher CO2 composition than we have today (about 20 times as much) have been found to be cooler using the same methods that Michael Mann uses to argue his hockey stick graph.
Considering that the last time there was 8000 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere was more than 5e7 years ago, I'd think that stellar evolution of our Sun could play a role in that (~4-5% less of radiative output at that time).
Ezekiel 23:20
Why does opposition to war automatically mean you're anti-military and vilifying soldiers?
Nobody ever said that it does, and there are many people today who oppose our nation's current overseas adventures but support the troops. However, back during 'Nam, that wasn't true, and those who opposed the war (mostly because they didn't want to be drafted) constantly showed their hatred of anybody in the US Armed Forces.
I call bullshit. Prove it.
I lived during the Vietnam war, I opposed the war, I had friends who were in the armed forces, and I didn't hate them.
Our opposition to the war had nothing to do with not wanting to be drafted. We didn't want to serve in a military that was oppressing other people.
You may be confusing us with Dick Cheney.
Incidentally, since you're judging others from such a high horse, when did you serve and what battle ribbons did you earn? Or perhaps you didn't serve at all.
Incidentally, since you're judging others from such a high horse, when did you serve and what battle ribbons did you earn? Or perhaps you didn't serve at all.
I spent over 7 months in Tonkin Gulf in '72, most of it on the Gun Line doing shore bombardment, and I have the service-connected hearing loss as a souvenir. My ship was one of the 38 that helped throw back the NVA during the Easter Offensive by taking advantage of the fact that their plans had completely ignored the fact that the USN completely controlled the eastern flank of the battlefield.
And, as far as how we were treated by the anti-war movement, I must congratulate you on your selective memory.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
As the other guy said, I'm saying Gore is an incompetent politician. Bill Clinton is a great politician. Even his enemies admire the man's skill. He had the nick name of "slick willy" because he was such a master speaker.
Gore by contrast was a wet fish. Very few politicians are as good as Bill Clinton. Again, I'm not saying his policies were good or bad... just that Bill was very good at politics. He knew how to talk to people.
Gore doesn't. He was handed the presidency on a golden platter and he fucked it up.
And after fucking it up, he went on to lead the green revolution which he's also done a shitty job at because he refuses to make friends.
He just insults and offends everyone making enemies out of people that otherwise might have supported him.
The green movement has done much the same thing. Big industry doesn't have to be your enemy. All they are going to care about is making money. Help them find a way to build a new green industry and they're not going to be your enemy.
Someone has to build all that stuff. And you're talking to people that take it as normal to build stuff on the bottom of the ocean or drill over a mile under the earth. These are not intellectual or engineering light weights. Why give them the finger and tell them they're assholes? That is not what a clever politician would have done. Such a person would have used and incorporated them.
Stupid politicians give everyone the finger, tell everyone "I'll do what I want", and then proceed to piss all over everyone. Short of a gun to my head, I'm not going to tolerate someone doing that to me. And by and large I am not alone. The only people that are putting up with it are those that think they're standing up on the pedestal with him pissing on everyone else. And over time most are coming to realize no one is up there but him a few other select interests. Which is why over time his political position is continually eroding.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
And thoroughly debunked (in peer-reviewed journals, natch) by McIntyre and McKitrick as an artifact of one proxy (Sheep Mountain) being artificially weighted hundreds of times more than any of the others. Without that one proxy, there would be no Hockey Stick shape and no academic career for Michael Mann.
The kicker is that in Michael Mann's files was clear evidence that he ran his algorithm using all proxies except Sheep Mountain (which would have shown no Hockey Stick shape) and then buried the result. He also claimed on more than one occasion not to have used the R2 metric which would have shown no statistical skill in his construction - which wasn't true because the calculating code for R2 was also in the files AND he put the calculated R2 into a diagram of the global locations of the proxies in his original publication.
Even more fun is that the Sheep mountain proxies used by Mann have been re-sampled and show no signs of the temperature sensitivity since 1980 when Mann's original data ended.
Regardless of people's position on AGW, a lot of climate scientists have come to the conclusion that what Mann did and continues to justify is scientific fraud.
Tubby or not tubby. Fat is the question