22 Replies to “Old Mann, New Trick”

  1. Renowned warmist caught manipulating data…..again.
    We can’t be perfect all the time can we?
    Please forward funds to help stave off extinction by breathing.
    I denounce myself for my denialist tendencies.

  2. For those who are put to sleep by technical papers, I’ll attempted a summary.
    Many temperature models were produced since the 80s. If you plot all of them, like the IPCC has done, and then compare it to actual observed temps you’ll see that the models vastly overestimated the temperature rise. What the true believers are now doing is cherry picking out the one model that is even reasonably close to the observed temps. But even that cherry picked model is showing a divergence between predicted rise and actual observations due mainly to the *17 year* temp plateau that none of the AGW models predicted. So in order to pretty up the graphically ugly, they have not included current data and use inconsistent comparisons (land plus sea to land only temps). See Figure 6 which shows how this changes the graph. Unless there is another side to the story… this is total crap science and statistics, IOW
    This is the type of research that separates out the faithful from the rational; climate evangelicals from the honest scientists; the gullible from the knowledgeable.

  3. Lets hope Mann can buy his Proctocology services in bulk because every time he crosses Steve, he gets a new giant, humongous asshole ripped in his credibility.
    Not the sharpest knife in the drawer that Mikey Mann.

  5. Pretty much as Bennett points out — produce enough “models”, cherry pick enough data sets and eventually you’ll find two which coincide for a select time frame. It’s a bit like systems which purport to pick winning lottery numbers. They “work” in retrospect but never make any useable predictions.
    AGW: an ill-defined hypothesis having no standardized system of measurement, and no falsifiable parameters making no useable predictions.

  6. If nothing else you have to admire the tenacity of the AGW Hysteria Fakirs (fakers?). This driving ambition to not go down in history as one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated upon the pubic, certainly drives them to excruciatingly complex ways to lie.

  7. I just heard a comment for the first time, from a reasonable fellow – climate change and global warming are different things. Can someone explain that one to me? The reality is it’s still heresy for many to challenge, in any way, AGW theory, no matter the facts or your environmental views.
    Mann et al have successfully hoodwinked the public on this issue. Their problem is most of the hoodwinked are fine with the wink and nudge but, at this point when you reach into their already stretched wallets, they quickly let go of the tree they were hugging.
    I believe the hoodwinked intuitively know carbon taxes to save the world is BS, but they’re still on an environmental guilt trip, muddled by neo-colonization grievances from the politically correct. It’s just easier to pay a little and move on, in the confident knowledge they’ll still be driving their vehicle to work in spite of some carbon tax designed to change their behaviour with the government the beneficiaries of lucky lucre. But, try and take their F150 or Dakota away by any means whatsoever – then you’re s*****d.
    One of these days we’ll go back to talking about actual pollution, not bogus plant food pollution. Going forward – when even tainted ground measurements show no invariable temperature increase, Mann et al will continue with their scripts until finally, when inevitable cooling is observed, they will claim credit for that – validation of their theories so let’s have even more guilt, I mean carbon, taxes. Wait for it – that’s what they’ll do.
    In my view they’re watching the band as the stern comes out of the water, but they can’t admit they were wrong. So, they’ll go down with her.

  8. LC:
    I’m not usually a stickler for details, but I have to object to the term “climate evangelicals”. Evangelical has been misconstrued as describing a person determined to force his or her opinion on everyone else, even (or perhaps especially) if they are wrong. While that definition fits most AGW proponents, it is not the correct definition of evangelical.
    Evangel simply means “good news”, the same meaning as the word gospel. An evangelical is therefore a person who spreads good news.
    For example, an evangelical Christian, which is my aspiration, spreads good news to a world filled with sinners doomed to suffer the wrath of God for their sins; that Jesus died as a sacrifice for the sins of all who believe in Him and who repent and accept Him as their Lord and savior. And that He was physically resurrected from the grave to prove that His followers are granted eternal life.

  9. Yep … this BS is not going away.
    It is the great scam of the last century and as various parasites down the food chain figure to make a buck off the suckers …. the bandwagon gets another lap around town.
    BTW “captcha” is a pos app…

  10. rocky
    “An evangelical is therefore a person who spreads good news”
    funny that, that’s exactly what the watermelons say they are doing, so, LC was spot on!!!!
    DrD
    “AGW: an ill-defined hypothesis having no standardized system of measurement, and no falsifiable parameters making no useable predictions”
    as I’v said many times, the methodology don’t hold water:-)))

  11. Actual pollution? Not till the Queen’s enemies are cleaned out of their dens in high places. The watermelons will never admit now that the only countries where there was no room for doubt that pollution posed a serious threat to human health were ruled by communists. Pollution in many villages in east Germany and Czechoslovakia was so severe that the villages were declared unfit for human habitation and abandoned. Acid rain, a trifling problem if that in the West, destroyed most of Eastern Europe’s forests. Don’t get me started on Khystym, Chernobyl or the Aral Sea.
    Of course, nothing was heard of any of this in the west until the Berlin Wall came down. Moscow paid western environmental groups top dollars to keep their gobs shut. The Muslim oil tyrants are doing the same thing today. For them, shutting down Western fossil fuel exploration is how they get the cash for fat national dividends at home (all stolen from the cultural heritage of the Western world), rockets to give to Amalekites to launch at the Jews, and mosques in every corner of the Christian world, a bomb factory in the back room of each one.

  12. I notice none of the weather doomers are cheering.
    They claimed they were alarmed because a 8-12 years correlation between rising global average temperature and CO2 emissions,supposedly convinced them CO2 was a dangerous greenhouse gas.
    Yet after 15-16 years of that same correlation being busted, they are not elated that empirical evidence has shown their computer modelled fears to be unfounded.
    Nope, in their world we are still evil for enjoying the best human environment ever, burning sequestered co2 from the past and enriching the environment of our vegetable friends.
    So lets see, burning hydrocarbons,
    Did not cause planet to cool(1960-1970s)
    Did not cause planet to warm (1980-2000)
    Does anyone think that burning oil will cause this extreme weather we hear so much of?
    This kind of storm has never happened since the last one?
    Everything is “unprecedented” if one was born yesterday.

  13. Well, I am not religious but I understand why you, RVR, would not want to be compared to AGW. I don’t go out of my way to offend religion but I do not go out of my way to protect religion either. I call ’em as I see ’em.
    Both C-AGW and religion share may aspects – guilt, shame, sin, redemption, appeal to authority, doom – to scare and control. At least mainstream Christian religions no longer pretend to be scientific and joining is voluntary. Climate scientists are petty tyrants sucking up to power hungry statists.

  15. Mann needs to make his way to Kelowna in late June. There will be cherries in need of being picked, and Lord knows he has mad skillz.

  16. @rocky redneck
    It is true that the meaning of the word evangelist has been altered over time.
    While it once meant one who spread good news, eventually it came to mean one who promoted something whether good or not (particularly in non-religious uses), and in some circles it now has a negative connotation, the same as the word “fundamentalist”. I think the negative connotation has come about because so many people who are promoters these days, whether late night infomercials or snake-oil salesman, are perceived negatively.
    Sometimes changes in the English language are engineered (eg the phrase climate change or climate disruption), sometimes they come about over time without intention and the word evangelist is one of those latter things.

  17. NME @1:21:
    I guess it’s good news to them if it gives them an excuse to control our lives; otherwise it sounds pretty much like BAD news to me. At least I don’t get upset if someone disagrees with me.
    LC @2:57:
    I have to admit that the aspects you name can be found in Christian evangelism, but there are some fundamental differences, and I don’t think Christianity on the whole has the objective of scaring and controlling people nowadays. I know that some television evangelists have been guilty of this, mostly to get people to donate money to them, but all of the evangelists that I know are interested only in saving souls from eternal damnation.
    As for Christians no longer pretending to be scientific, I am delighted to say that the opposite is true, Christian scientists are finding that the more science advances, the more it can be seen to agree with the Bible. Dr. Hugh Ross, a PhD astrophysicist, has written several books which go into great detail on this point, including:
    – The Creator and the Cosmos: How the Latest Scientific Discoveries of the Century Reveal God
    – Why the Universe Is the Way It Is
    – Beyond the Cosmos: What Recent Discoveries in Astrophysics Reveal about the Glory and Love of God
    I can direct you to many other books which share this viewpoint.
    Another interesting book is “The Case for Christ” by Lee Strobel. It is a book which uses an interesting evidence – based approach to proving that the Bible is true and accurate, and Jesus really is who he says he is. “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6)
    Sorry for getting preachy, but I have been convinced that Christianity is the truth after 45 years of denying and running away from God, and I just can’t help wanting to share this good news with the world.
    At least if you don’t like what I say, you can ignore me – it works for my brother, LOL.

  18. SCF:
    I’m afraid you are probably right, and I’m trying to reverse time and linguistic evolution. I will agree that languages evolve, but not species. 🙂

  21. John, just who is denying that the arctic ice is forming new patterns? Or do you think it’s proof of “global warming”? Perhaps you should look at the other end of the world, where the ice in the antarctic is increasing. The word “global” means just that, and should not be confused with “local.”

  22. Forming new patterns? Wow. That is some amazing mental gymnastics you are performing there. If by “new patterns” you mean ice turning into water, then yes. That’s what I mean. The Antarctic is in fact warming. Just because there is more ice is not an indicator that the planet isn’t warming. Remember, it’s still pretty freaking cold down there. What is happening most likely is that there is more precipitation, which means more ice and snow.
    But I’m not going to convince you.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation