Micheal Mann of the University of Pennsylvania is one of the biggest names in “climate science.” Mann is the inventor of the Hockey Stick graph, a representation of the Earth’s temperatures during the past 1000 years, which shows relatively consistent temperatures for most of that time until recent years when it jumps straight up. Mann’s chart looks sort of like a hockey stick with its blade pointed up.
As charts go, the Hockey Stick is very easy to understand and would make tons of sense if only it wasn’t based on bogus numbers. Mann is now running scared, because the GOP is on to him. This past Friday he wrote an op ed in the Washington Post begging people to vote Democratic, because a Republican-led congress will actually try to investigate the truth about Climate Change, and possibly investigate Mann himself.
Just in the past year and without a congressional subpoena we have learned much about the Mann scam :
- To create most of the chart , climate change scientists had to use natural sources (as opposed to sending a scientist back in time with a thermometer). Tree rings and ice core samples were used to measure the temperature levels, which is standard procedure. What isn’t standard procedure is the fact that the tree samples were selected to skew the study.
- The scientists substituted a different kind of tree, who’s rings would not show a medieval warming spell with temperatures much hotter than today
- There were other temperature-change graphs developed at the same time as Mann’s but not used. These graphs differed markedly from the rest, leading to a controversy in the run-up to a conference of paleo-climatologists in Tanzania in September 1999. The abnormal temperature graph was “a problem and a potential distraction/detraction from the reasonably consensus viewpoint we’d like to show,” paleo-climatologist Michael Mann wrote in an e-mail, adding that he didn’t want to be the one to offer “the skeptics & a field day.” The lead author of the IPCC chapter, Chris Folland, wrote in another e-mail that the divergent data set “dilutes the message rather significantly.”
- Even the CRU (home of Climate-Gate) argued against using the hockey-stick graph because they felt it was flawed.
Knowing that his scam has been exposed, Mann has taken to begging the liberal elite in the WAPO:
take our poll - story continues below
As a scientist, I shouldn’t have a stake in the upcoming midterm elections, but unfortunately, it seems that I — and indeed all my fellow climate scientists — do.
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) has threatened that, if he becomes chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, he will launch what would be a hostile investigation of climate science. The focus would be on e-mails stolen from scientists at the University of East Anglia in Britain last fall that climate-change deniers have falsely claimed demonstrate wrongdoing by scientists, including me. Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) may do the same if he takes over a committee on climate change and energy security.
My employer, Penn State University, exonerated me after a thorough investigation of my e-mails in the East Anglia archive. Five independent investigations in Britain and the United States, and a thorough recent review by the Environmental Protection Agency, also have cleared the scientists of accusations of impropriety.
Yes but think of what one could find out in an independent inquiry?
Nonetheless, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is investigating my previous employer, the University of Virginia, based on the stolen e-mails. A judge rejected his initial subpoena, finding that Cuccinelli had failed to provide objective evidence of wrongdoing. Undeterred, Cuccinelli appealed the decision to the Virginia Supreme Court and this week issued a new civil subpoena.
What could Issa, Sensenbrenner and Cuccinelli possibly think they might uncover now, a year after the e-mails were published?
Actually Cuccinelli also wanted the data you used to make the chart, you know to see if it could be replicated. I understand that’s a big deal in science. Besides, the State of Virginia paid for the research.
The truth is that they don’t expect to uncover anything. Instead, they want to continue a 20-year assault on climate research, questioning basic science and promoting doubt where there is none.
Cuccinelli, in fact, rests his case largely on discredited claims that Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.) made during hearings in 2005 at which he attacked me and my fellow researchers. Then-Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R-N.Y.) had the courage and character to challenge Barton’s attacks. We need more political leaders like him today.
We have lived through the pseudo-science that questioned the link between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer, and the false claims questioning the science of acid rain and the hole in the ozone layer. The same dynamics and many of the same players are still hard at work, questioning the reality of climate change…..
And we are living through the pseudo-science that says any climate change has something to do with humans. Remember this Famous Email?
Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000
Cc: [email protected]@XXXX
Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm,
Once Tim’s got a diagram here we’ll send that either later today or first thing tomorrow.I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.Mike’s series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998.
Thanks for the comments, Ray.
Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone XXXX
School of Environmental Sciences Fax XXXX
University of East Anglia
Hiding the decline? That must be what Mann means about attacking Science.
…..My fellow scientists and I must be ready to stand up to blatant abuse from politicians who seek to mislead and distract the public. They are hurting American science. And their failure to accept the reality of climate change will hurt our children and grandchildren, too.
Let me translate the above into English, “Holy Crap they are on to me. They want to conduct an independent investigation into my bogus science. PLEASE vote for Democrats and save my butt.”