Posts Tagged ‘Michael Mann’

Mann is “A disgrace to the profession” – as “climate science” is a disgrace to “science”

August 14, 2015

I am waiting for my Kindle edition of Mark Steyn’s “A disgrace to the profession” which is only available on 1st September from Amazon. Something to look forward to.

If “the profession” is supposed to be  “climate science” then this so-called “science” – having no falsifiable hypotheses – is itself a disgrace. But certainly Michael Mann is classified and gets paid as a “scientist” and as an “academic”. And to both those classes, Mann is an embarrassment and a disgrace. His construction of the “hockey stick” was not just invalid and unjustified, it was close to fraud. (The Hockey Stick Illusion). But the gullibility of those who have swallowed the illusion without application of mind or any other critical judgement is also a disgrace to sentience.

WUWT has a review of this compilation of what other scientists have to say about Michael Mann’s work on the “hockey stick”.


I remember when Mann decided to sue NRO and Steyn for defamation, and despite all the laughing at the time there was this prescient thought from Dr. Judith Curry:

“Mark Steyn is formidable opponent. I suspect that this is not going to turn out well for you.”

Well, Part 1, or should I say, Volume 1 of that prediction is now in press. It’s a scorcher, hilarity, and a tale of science and politics gone awry all in one.

Steyn realized the word of a political pundit like himself can only travel so far in certain circles, and in a brilliant move, he has gathered a compendium of what other scientists have to say about Mann’s work on the “hockey stick”. And of course, he’s had it illustrated by Josh. My favorite is Mann as Yoda, wielding a hockey stick rather than a light saber, seen in this collage below:

If Michael Mann is a disgrace to a profession which itself is a disgrace, it is not a case of one disgrace cancelling the other, but a case of Mann being doubly disgraced.


Penn State whitewash of Michael Mann exposed

March 9, 2011

Two things which were were always pretty clear have now been proven.

  1. Michael Mann of the Hockey Stick Illusion and the cherry picking of data did indeed ask his friends and colleagues to delete incriminating emails, and
  2. The so-called Penn State inquiry into Mann and his actions cherry picked the evidence to give a pre-determined result.

A federal government inspector general has revealed prima facie proof that the so-called independent inquiries widely if implausibly described as clearing the ClimateGate principals of wrongdoing were, in fact, whitewashes. This has been confirmed to Senate offices. It will not be released to the public for some time because the investigation is ongoing.

The document, an interview transcript, will put an end to the foolish talk of anything resembling a ClimateGate “inquiry” having taken place. It will also invite a real inquiry into the affair. Expect fireworks, as the one such effort, by Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, is being fought hysterically by Big Science and Big Academia.

Critically, it also begs questions of Penn State University, which conducted one of the three supposed inquiries into ClimateGate. The key point is that the Penn State investigators never interviewed a principal who was able to confirm or deny a key charge against “Hockey Stick” lead author of “Hide the Decline” infamy Michael Mann. This individual has now been interviewed, and what he told federal investigators has indicted Mann and Penn State. The inspector general’s report specifically reveals Penn State’s wagon-circlers to have been at best comically negligent/inept in allowing Mann to not answer the damning charge they were tasked with examining: did he delete or ask others to delete records? At worst, they were complicit in the cover-up.

Simply by interviewing Mann’s colleague Eugene Wahl, PSU would have exposed Mann’s “answer” for what it was (and wasn’t). Such an interview was obviously necessary for any inquiry. Penn State chose not to conduct it, for its own reasons. A federal inspector general has now conducted it. And the result is damning of both Mann and the parties that chose not to interview Wahl.

As background, Phil Jones in the United Kingdom asked Mann, now at Penn State, by email to delete records being sought under the UK’s Freedom of Information Act, and to get a colleague to do so as well:

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment — minor family crisis.

Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t have his new email address.

We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

“Gene” is Eugene Wahl, who now works for the federal government.

Mann’s terse reply included in pertinent part:

I’ll contact Gene about this ASAP

Now, from Penn State’s supposed inquiry and exoneration of Michael Mann:

Allegation 2: Did you engage in, or participate in, directly or indirectly, any actions with the intent to delete, conceal or otherwise destroy emails, information and/or data, related to AR4, as suggested by Phil Jones?

Finding 2. After careful consideration of all the evidence and relevant materials, the inquiry committee finding is that there exists no credible evidence that Dr. Mann had ever engaged in, or participated in, directly or indirectly, any actions with intent to delete, conceal or otherwise destroy emails, information and/or data related to AR4, as suggested by Dr. Phil Jones. Dr. Mann has stated that he did not delete emails in response to Dr. Jones’ request. Further, Dr. Mann produced upon request a full archive of his emails in and around the time of the preparation of AR4. The archive contained e-mails related to AR4.

If the above excerpt accurately reflects Mann’s testimony, both Mann’s “answer” and his peers’ acceptance of it ought to raise red flags. Penn State asked Mann and only Mann if he destroyed records or was indirectly involved in destroying records. Mann said only that he did not destroy records. And that did it. Even though Phil Jones asked Mann to instruct Wahl to do so as well.


To serve Mann

Wahl Transcript Excerpt

Termites predict climate change!

September 13, 2010

Image via Wikipedia

USA Today reports that Termites help predict impact of climate change.

They rely on instinct rather than mathematical models but they surely couldn’t do worse than Michael Mann & The Hockey Stick Gang

Termites are careful builders that locate their mounds in areas with the right balance of moisture and drainage. This intuitive understanding of geology and hydrology can help explain how a local ecosystem might evolve, according to the study by the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology.

“By understanding the patterns of the vegetation and termite mounds over different moisture zones, we can project how the landscape might change with climate change,” explains co-author Greg Asner.

Regional insight into savanna hydrogeomorphology from termite mounds

by Shaun R. Levick, Gregory P. Asner, Oliver A. Chadwick, Lesego M. Khomo, Kevin H. Rogers, Anthony S. Hartshorn, Ty Kennedy-Bowdoin & David E. Knapp

%d bloggers like this: