All Mann did was tweet a quote (the quotation marks are clearly there) + a link to the original source of the claim. https://twitter.com/MichaelEMann/status/...
Are you serious Mike?
Mann is singing the tune they want to hear. The hockey stick was one of the biggest frauds perpetrated on science in a long time and he got away with it. He simply had to modify it on numerous occasions but in the end alarmists still use his studies as a pillar of their religion. It is like arguing the Piltdown Mann was valid because it had a real ape jaw and real human skull. I would have a hard time believing even the alarmists who post here would think 1 in 27 million is reasonable in any way yet we have Greengo excusing it by revealing quotation marks. Instead, Greengo should simply state how idiotic 1 in 27 million is. Alarmists simply can't go there and that is why I call it their religion (well one of the many reasons)
(Had to edit Greengo name)
Fourier calculated in1824 that the Earth would be far colder if it lacked an atmosphere.
In 1859 Tyndall discovers that some gases block infrared radiation. He suggests that changes in the concentration of the gases could bring climate change.
In 1896 Arrhenius publishes first calculation of global warming from human emissions of CO2.
And you think ot is "outrageous" when some one states that global warming is a fact? Sure there is natural varability etc, but if you want to be outraged maybe you could reserve it for the many claims that state that CO2 does not cause the earth to retain more of the sun's energy.
What's actually outrageous is that skeptics are still trying to shrug away a century's worth of advancement in our understanding of climate science because they really want to believe that the multi-billion dollar profit-making products of the fossil fuel industry couldn't possibly have any negative impact whatsoever, the 650,000 year all-time record CO2 rise is occurring now but it's a sheer fluke that that happens to also be the time period over which we've pumped hundreds of billions of tonnes of CO2 into the sky, and that despite what physicists and chemists have been telling us for a century, CO2 isn't a greenhouse gas, doesn't trap heat, and the laws of thermodynamics are a Communist plot to prevent the perpetual energy machine being constructed.
The reason Michael Mann gets away with such things is because at one point Ben Santer declared that climate skeptics feel if they can take out Michael Mann then the entire IPCC will collapse. Michael Mann is considered 'too big to fail', and they circle the wagons around him even though they don't agree with his work. Climategate e-mails show that they consider his work to be shoddy, and Mann is a bully who argues with journals that scientists' work that disagrees with Mann's should not be published(not even the skeptics but people like Briffa).
He gets away with these statements because he believes in so-called "global warming". That means he's part of the club. If he wasn't a believer, it wouldn't make a difference if what he said was scientifically correct - believers would still claim he was wrong.
Michael Mann is a second rate climatologist who is either fraudulent in his studies or suffers from gross confirmation bias and is extremely incompetent. Whichever is correct, alarmists love him for it because he will always cover up facts and are counter productive to the CAGW cause. That an alarmist like Mann exaggerates in news articles bothers me less than him manipulating data in studies to confirm his own belief in CAGW.
He's the girl who cried "wolf" so many times that no one cared if the girl cried wolf. Eventually the girl doesn't care and will cry wolf just to get the attention she so depends on.
There's nothing outrageous about that. He's simply reporting the findings.
There is a link in one of the discussions you linked to.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/7a5be77dc...
Are you making the claim that the planet is not warming?
I had an answer to a question about 2014 being the warmest (although apparently "hottest" is the new replacement term). In it, I referenced the link news article with this:
Some of Michael Mann's comments.
"There is less than a 1-in-27 million chance that Earth's [2014] record hot streak is natural"
“The record temperatures *should* put to rest the absurd notion of a “pause”.
And I asked alarmists to point out the exaggerations. Well, I noticed on Twitter that my wish was granted:
@PeterGleick 1-in-27 million looks way wrong. Probably poor assumptions about persistence, natural variability
― Tim Osborn (@TimOsbornClim) https://twitter.com/TimOsbornClim/status/556196587433910272
Connolley, Annan, Grumbine & I iirc tried without success to dissuade him @aDissentient @AndyMeanie @borenbears @ClimateSystem
― mtobis (@mtobis) https://twitter.com/mtobis/status/556210415617593347
So even with alarmists questioning Mann, how does he keep getting away with his misleading alarmism?
He has an outrageous personality, so how could you expect anything different.
Such statements are only outrageous to denialists.
Well he's not really known for his honesty is he?
He lies all the time
maybe he knows more
