Analysis: ‘Michael Mann Embarrasses Himself before Congress’
by JULIE KELLY March 30, 2017 5:23 PM
If the climate-change evangelist can’t be bothered to take a House hearing seriously, why should anyone take him seriously? In his testimony to the House Science Committee on Wednesday, Michael Mann, one of the world’s leading climate scientists, told the story of Trofim Lysenko, a plant scientist who worked for Stalinist Russia: Lysenko was a Russian agronomist and it became Leninist doctrine to impose his views about heredity, which were crackpot theories, completely at odds with the world’s scientists. Under Stalin, scientists were being jailed if they disagreed with his theories about agriculture. And Russian agriculture actually suffered, scientists were jailed, many died in their jail cells and potentially millions of people suffered from the disastrous agriculture policies that followed from that. The gist of Mann’s anecdote was that scientists who challenge the ruling government’s diktat on any given scientific issue are demonized and punished while innocent bystanders suffer. In the here and now, this would seemingly apply to the minority of scientists brave enough to question the reigning dogma of climate science. After all, these are the folks who have been threatened by top law-enforcement officials, personally and professionally attacked by their peers, and even driven out of their academic positions due to the harassment. But astonishingly, Mann was not talking about those scientists: He was talking about himself. In his alternative universe, he and other climate scientists are the martyrs, oppressed and silenced by the Politburo. Never mind that Mann — a tenured professor at one of the country’s top public universities — opened his testimony by reciting a prodigious list of awards he has won, books he has authored, scientific organizations he leads. He is celebrated by the media and environmental groups around the world, and yet in front of Congress he talked like a guy on his way to the Gulag. It takes a special blend of hubris, juvenility, and dishonesty to portray yourself as a victim when you are really the bully.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/446295/michael-mann-house-testimony-climate-change-embarrassing-rude…
Michael Mann Vs the Truth at Congressional Climate Hearing – Caught in Multiple Provable Falsehoods
31 Mar 201751
Apart from being a tetchy, hotheaded, rude, bullying, cackhanded, ignorant, malevolent and embarrassingly useless excuse for a scientist, Professor Michael Mann – the guy behind the serially-discredited Hockey Stick – is also the most outrageous liar.
Mann used often to claim that he was a Nobel Prizewinner – till someone unhelpfully pointed out that he was but one of hundreds of scientists who contributed to Assessment Reports by the IPCC (which did win the Nobel Prize in 2007)
This week the bald-pated shyster was up to his old tricks again, telling a string of porkie pies at a climate science hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.
Given how litigious the mendacious, bloviating poltroon can be – he’s currently engaged in at least two defamation suits: one against Tim Ball, the other against Mark Steyn – I obviously have to tread very carefully here.
So I’d just like to say, as delicately and politely as I can to the Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science at Penn State University:
“Liar, liar. Your pants on fire.”
Here’s the evidence:
Porkie Number One
Mann told the Congressional hearing he had no association or affiliation with the Climate Accountability Institute (one of the numerous ad hoc organisations formed in order to give the harassment of climate sceptics an air of scientific credibility).
Yet according to his CV he sits on the Climate Accountability Institute’s advisory board and has done since 2014.
Porkie Number Two
Mann denied having called his fellow climate scientist and special witness, former Georgia Tech Judith Curry, a “denier”.
“A number of statements have been attributed to me. I don’t believe I’ve called anybody a denier,” he solemnly told the hearing.
To which Judith Curry, sitting next to him, replied: “It’s in your written testimony. Go read it again.”
You can watch the moment where Curry smacks him down below:
Mann then proceeded indignantly to quibble that though he might have called Curry a “climate science denier” he hadn’t called her a “climate change denier”. [As if there’s any meaningful distinction between the two slurs]. But this claim – as Stephen McIntyre notes – was also a lie.
confronted with written evidence that he called Curry “climate science denier”, Mann said he hadnt called her “climate CHANGE denier”. #FAKE
Watch: Climatologist Dr. Judith Curry smacks down warmist Michael Mann for denying calling her a ‘denier’
AP’s Borenstein calls out Michael Mann for a whopper: ‘Mann said he didn’t call Curry a denier. But in his written testimony he called Curry ‘a climate science denier’ – Associated Press: At first Mann said he didn’t call Curry a denier. But in his written not oral testimony he called Curry “a climate science denier.” Mann said there’s a difference between denying climate change and “denying established science” on how much humans cause climate change, which he said Curry did.
Also see: Warmist Michael Mann tells whopper at congressional science hearing?…
Congressman and Michael Mann battle over ‘Stalinist tactics’ in ‘global warming’ debate
…AP’s Borenstein calls out Michael Mann for a whopper: ‘Mann said he didn’t call Curry a denier. But in his written testimony he called Curry ‘a climate science denier’
…Warmist Michael Mann tells whopper at congressional science hearing?
Testifying before Congress, climate scientist Michael Mann denies any affiliation or association to the Climate Accountability Institute despite his apparent membership on the Institute’s Council of Advisors.
CONGRESSMAN CLAY HIGGINS: “Are you affiliated or associated with an organization called The Climate Accountability Institute?”
DR. MICHAEL MANN: “No. I mean I may have corresponded with people.”
CONGRESSMAN CLAY HIGGINS: “You’re not affiliated nor associated with them?”
DR. MICHAEL MANN: “I can provide– I’ve submitted my CV you can see who I’m associated with and who I am not.”
Hearing – Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method
US House Committee on Science, Space and Technology
March 29, 2017
But a link to Climate Accountability Institute’s website features Michael Mann as one of the groups’ ‘Council of Advisors.”
http://climateaccountability.org/about.html
Update: March 31, 2017: James Delingpole of Brietbart reports Mann’s own CV lists his role
Mann told the Congressional hearing he had no association or affiliation with the Climate Accountability Institute (one of the numerous ad hoc organisations formed in order to give the harassment of climate sceptics an air of scientific credibility).
Yet according to his CV he sits on the Climate Accountability Institute’s advisory board and has done since 2014. (Mann’s CV states: “Advisory Board, Climate Accountability Institute, 2014-“
#
Related Information:
Michael Mann’s Affiliation with Climate Accountability Institute
As of July 2014, Mann appears as a member of the Board of Advisors of the Climate Accountability Institute (CAI) on the organization’s website. His affiliation connects him directly with the organized efforts to prosecute climate skeptics via RICO statutes, which got its start with Naomi Oreskes, co-founder of CAI.
RICO, the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization, is a law designed to battle organized crime, but was later used in civil cases, particularly against tobacco companies that were subject to billion-dollar lawsuits to compensate for the health problems of their customers. Oreskes conflated tobacco with fossil fuels, seeking to enforce penalties sufficient to destroy the fossil fuel industry through prosecution of both producers and advocates, particularly climate skeptics.
Mann’s affiliation with this effort indicates his dedication to prosecute “deniers.” (The environmental left has chosen this term specifically to equate those skeptical of catastrophic man-caused global warming to Holocaust deniers. Mann refuses to use the term “skeptic.” ) Mann’s allegiance to prosecution for skeptics is symbolized by his advisory status with …
Another (Michael) Manntastic claim: Extreme weather events linked to climate change impact on the jet stream
From Penn State, and the “close but no cigar” department (see bold in text) comes this modelspalooza masquerading as science: Unprecedented summer warmth and flooding, forest fires, drought and torrential rain — extreme weather events are occurring more and more often, but now an international team of climate scientists has found a connection between many…
Source: Another Manntastic claim: Extreme weather events linked to climate change impact on the jet stream…
Great debate!? Judith Curry, John Christy & Roger Pielke Jr. set to battle against Michael Mann at House Science Committee Hearing on March 29
by Judith Curry Witnesses: John Christy, Judith Curry, Michael Mann and Roger Pielke Jr. The hearing will be held next week, March 29. The announcement for the Hearing is [ here ]. I’ve completed my written testimony, I will post it Wednesday once the Hearing has commenced.
50 Inverted Hockey Sticks – Scientists Find Earth Cools As CO2 Rises
Modern ‘Warmth’ Just A Brief Excursion From 8,000-Year (Continuing) Cooling Trend The scientific literature is replete with evidence that the geological record for the Holocene (the last 10,000 years) fails to support the concept that rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations cause ocean and land temperatures to rise.
Source: 50 Inverted Hockey Sticks – Scientists Find Earth Cools As CO2 Rises…
30 New (2017) Scientific Papers Crush The Hockey Stick Graph And ‘Global’-Scale Warming Claims
30 New (2017) Scientific Papers Crush The Hockey Stick Graph And ‘Global’-Scale Warming Claims
The Globe Has Not Been Warming . . . So Why Is It Called ‘Global’ Warming? There were at least 60 peer-reviewed scientific papers published in 2016 demonstrating that Today’s Warming Isn’t Global, Unprecedented, Or Remarkable. As of the end of January, another 17 papers had already been published in 2017. 17 New (2017) Scientific Papers Affirm Today’s Warming Is Not Global, Unprecedented, Or Remarkable Within the last month, another 14 papers have been published that continue to cast doubt on the popularized conception of an especially unusual global-scale warming during modern times. Yes, some regions of the Earth have been warming in recent decades or at some point in the last 100 years. Some regions have been cooling for decades at a time. And many regions have shown no significant net changes or trends in either direction relative to the last few hundred to thousands of years. In other words, there is nothing historically unprecedented or remarkable about today’s climate when viewed in the context of natural variability. Goursaud et al., 2017 Wilson et al., 2017 Cai and Liu et al., 2017 “2003– 2009 was the warmest period in the reconstruction. 1970– 2000 was colder than the last stage of the Little Ice Age (LIA).” Tegzes et al., 2017 “The objective of this study was to investigate northward oceanic heat transport in the NwASC [Norwegian Atlantic Slope Current] on longer, geologically meaningful time scales. To this end, we reconstructed variations in the strength of the NwASC over the late-Holocene using the sortable-silt method. We then analysed the statistical relationship between our palaeo-flow reconstructions and published upper-ocean hydrography proxy records from the same location on the mid-Norwegian Margin. Our sortable-silt time series show prominent multi-decadal to multi-centennial variability, but no clear long-term trend over the past 4200 years. … [O]ur findings indicate that variations in the strength of the main branch of the Atlantic Inflow may not necessarily translate into proportional changes in northward oceanic heat transport in the eastern Nordic Seas.” Fernández-Fernández et al., 2017 “The abrupt climatic transition of the early 20th century and the 25-year warm period 1925–1950 triggered the main retreat and volume loss of these glaciers since the end of the ‘Little Ice Age’. Meanwhile, cooling during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s altered the trend, with advances of the glacier snouts.” …