Michael Mann, who has staked his reputation on being right about climate change, has apparently abandoned the science that he said he’s kept his "head buried in" for "much" of his career.
Mann, a climate scientist chosen to help the Democratic Party draft its election-year platform, has concluded that "these tools that we’ve spent years developing increasingly are unnecessary."
So if the global warming alarmists should no longer use these tools — the climate prediction computer models — to badger the rest of us, then what should they use? Well, just tell some tales, of course.
"We can see climate change, the impacts of climate change, now, playing out in real time, on our television screens, in the 24-hour news cycle," Mann told Democrats at a platform draft hearing last month. "The signal of climate change is no longer subtle, it is obvious."
Maybe Mann, from his ivory tower at Penn State University, is seeing something we’re not. Whatever it is, there’s no way he can, with any degree of certainty, say it’s caused by humans. As we’ve said before, there are simply too many variables to declare without reservation that man’s carbon-dioxide emissions are causing the planet to overheat. Our climate is too complex for an explanation as simplistic as that.
But Mann is right about abandoning the models that he’s used to try "to tease out" — isn’t this a second admission that a con is going down? — "the signal of human-caused climate change." The models that the global warming scare are based on are severely flawed.
And the models are not really solid science themselves. Aside from being consistently wrong, predicting more warming than has been observed, they have taken the place of doing the real work of science — which involves actual experimentation, not just fiddling with highly questionable math models. Scholars Patrick J. Michaels and David E. Wojick recently wrote in the Cato Institute’s At Liberty blog that the "the climate science research that is done appears to be largely focused on improving the models."
They certainly could be improved upon. But so, too, can Mann’s observational skills. He’s seeing things.
http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/global-warming-alarmist-reveals-the-anti-science-con/
Definitely Mann-made climate change……..
Proved by Mannipulating the data using AlGoreithms…
An open and defiant admission that climate science is not a physical science, but a field within the social sciences. The evidence comes from our expectations and shared values, not from measurements of nature.
Well, for someone who can tease out the temperature signal in tree rings, teasing out human contribution should not be too hard.
Like when I’m driving and the traffic gets too heavy, I just take off my glasses and, Hey! Presto! the roads clear.
“We can see climate change, the impacts of climate change, now, playing out in real time, on our television screens, in the 24-hour news cycle,”
television screens are really not unbiased sources of data about nature. he should get out of the house and go for a walk or something and take some data right out there in the middle of nature where we live and of which we are an integral part.
A definate admission that this is not about science but rather a desperate hope that one can be convinced to see zebras where there are horses. There some empirical evidence that people can be talked into seeing what is not there, so at least the new claims of Mann have a bit of empirical evidence.
As I have long stated, this is about marketing, not science. Sell the product, never mind if it works or is worth the cost. Admittedly, that is far easier than selling the science. Science takes work. It takes understanding. “Buy this gizmo—you really need it” or “The sky is overheating and we’re all going to die—someday and it could be soon” are proven sales techniques. Maybe Mann did finally realize his “science” wasn’t selling and decided to up the sales with a proven technique.
In reality, all he has to do is tell the zebras to take off their silly pajamas?
Dr. Mann made his intentions crystal clear in an interview several years back… 2010.
“The violent threats are not what bother Michael Mann the most. He’s used to them. Instead, it’s the fact that his life’s work — the effort to stop global warming — has been under siege since last fall.” Quote from Brian Winter, USA TODAY (3/11/2010).
His LIFE’S work has been to STOP global warming?
In May I gave a talk to a weekly conservative luncheon group: “Science Gets A Slap-Shot From Michael Mann’s Hockey Stick”. I had boiled the “climate change” hoax down to a discussion of Mann’s preposterous allegations. Gave them a brief outline of the requirements for the scientific method to be met.
I also handed out a sheet listing useful books and websites including this one and Watts Up With That? The other thing I did was to give them ammunition by explaining and giving the website for details on just how the “97% of scientists…..” hoax was perpetrated.
Mann knows good and well that he cannot prove a connection between the Earth’s climate and CO2, yet he claims to be able to see it on his tv screen.
I’ve probably been watching tv at least as long as Mr. Mann, and I don’t see the connection he claims to see.
Just saying something is so, doesn’t make it true. Mann is indulging in wishful thinking, and presenting it as science. How unscientific is that.
Mann is either a con-artist, or has started to believe his own lies and become delusional.
If you read the route by which Mann reached his “hockey stick”, by throwing out the Medieval Warming and Little Ice Age to show a flat climate for the last 1000 years until the 20th century, you cannot doubt that Mann in a con-artist, and just plain evil.
“Whatever it is, there’s no way he can, with any degree of certainty, say it’s caused by humans..”.
Indeed, and he cannot even tell them that it was caused by climate and not just weather. Isn’t that what he sees out of his window?
The psyche’s of Mann and Blair are clearly merging into one great, delusional mess.
In some ways, it’s akin to the development of the marshmallow monster in ‘Ghost Busters’.
Will we see their respective locations covered in a giant, grey mess of exploded brain contents when they finally explode?
Reblogged this on The Arts Mechanical and commented:
Well maybe he sees it in the rainstorm from yesterday. Certainly not from checking the local weather station.
Well that’s funny – from my window it looks 100% natural.
No, actually, I polled all the people in my neighborhood and 97% of them agree that there is climate change and it’s probably man-made. OK, correction….. when I limited it to non-blind individuals who live in my neighborhood, have windows, and are not climate scientists, don’t work for Obama, pay taxes and have not been indoctrinated in school – we have 99.7% who believe there is probably climate change.
It really is just like the Cook, et al paper. 0.3% believe there is CC and the man-made component is dominant.
Guess we all really just had to look out the window after all. That Michael Mann is smarter than I thought.
Mann and his ilk are textbook examples of confirmation bias and group-think. Their science is in short supply.
He’s clearly got his ‘Day After Tomorrow’ DVD on continuous loop !!!!
Reblogged this on 4timesayear's Blog.
I wonder if he can see this weather satellite from his window.
He used to be above debting, by using the “scientific argument” that “you wouldn’t go to a dentist to have your gall bladder operated on”…. but now, it’s just a matter of looking out the window. Isn’t he the same guy who used bristletoe pine trees to determine temperatures during the LIA and the MWP?
As “Volcanic eruptions are triggered by cosmic rays” (Ebisuzaki et al 2011), REPELLING those rays with Boeing-tested Laser Plasma Shields, will stop devastating-cooling electro-eruptions! http://LaserEarthShield.info