Kim. Many people thought Game of Thrones was based upon the English Wars of the Roses, but the author said it was based more on the various intrigues and wars of Medieval central Europe - so almost a good catch . Mrs K finally succumbed and watched a few episodes and now is an avid fan. You might like it but start at the beginning

GoT is something I need to get into. My daughter in law's parents are life long friends of the author and I need to be able to follow along with the conversation when it turns to GoT. I have seen a few episodes but clearly not enough to "get it". The production quality and the writing is superior. But the plot is obviously complex.

Kim. Many people thought Game of Thrones was based upon the English Wars of the Roses, but the author said it was based more on the various intrigues and wars of Medieval central Europe ......

Jan 15, 2017 at 4:27 PM | Supertroll

It seems that it is more "evidence based" than Climate Science. Does it have a happy ending?

http://joannenova.com.au/2017/01/scott-pruitts-nomination-a-call-for-support-so-he-can-stop-the-trainwreck-that-is-the-epa/

Mann is NOT Trump's No1 priority. Climate Science is.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/16/open-letter-to-the-president-elect-supporting-scott-pruitt-for-epa-administrator/

The heat is on, but no cause for celebration by the Global Warmists.

Just a reminder - not long now:

"IIRC Mann V Ball comes to trial in British Colombia on February 17th."

Jan 8, 2017 at 4:56 PM | Unregistered Commenter Entropic man

The problem that I have with GoT, as with any fantasy, they can make it up as they go along.

For the exact same definition and reason, I have a problem with CliSci.

"Mann V Ball comes to trial in British Colombia on February 17th."

Or perhaps not, if this is correct:

http://principia-scientific.org/breaking-key-un-climate-fraudster-makes-concessions-tim-ball-lawsuit/

I have only skimmed it, but it looks as though Mann is continuing his delaying tactics. Does anyone have more information?

The problem that I have with GoT, as with any fantasy, they can make it up as they go along.

For the exact same definition and reason, I have a problem with CliSci.

Feb 11, 2017 at 9:07 PM | Unregistered Commenterssat

GoT? It took me quite a while to figure out what you were referring to, as I am not a viewer. Then, once I figured it out, I recalled another BH commenter saying that it frequently involved episodes of people "being taken from behind".

At that point, the analogy with Climate-Science immediately became crystal clear.

I'm struggling to find out what's going on and why in Mann -v- Ball, but Mark Steyn's website contains this:

"I wrote the other day:

Next month, by the way, I'll be north of the border to see the litigious hockey-stick huckster [Michael E Mann] take on my compatriot Tim Ball in Vancouver. If you're in the neighbourhood, do swing by and say hello.

If you're in Goose Bay, Labrador and about to set off, save your Greyhound fare. The Mann vs Ball trial has now been mysteriously "adjourned" until a not yet specified later date. So yet again the court system appears willing to assist the litigious Mann's resort to interminable lawsuits that never actually get to trial. But I promise this: In BC as in DC, the courtroom doors will eventually be prised open, and I will be there."

It does look as though the trial has been postponed, and from the little I can find out, it appears that the delays are from Mann.

Entropic Man, Phil Clarke, or anyone! Can you add information, please?

Mark Hodgson, perhaps the day clashed with a hairdresser's appointment, but it does tend to confirm that Mann DOES NOT want to end up in Court.

Would you like to put your reputation at risk in a town known across Canada as "insanity by the sea"?

Supertroll, if Vancouver is referred to as "insanity by the sea", can their sea level changes be trusted to show no acceleration?

If the trial had been in Walmington-on-Sea, Corporal Jones could have told everyone " Don't Panic!" which is what Mann and the IPCC should have been told 20 years ago.

Those Climate Scientists, they don't like it up 'em, you know.

Gwen. Vancouver has so much rainfall that most Canadians speculate Vancouverites have webbed feet. Consequently they don't care about sea-level rise.

It was Private Frazer who suggested more equanimity and Lance Corporal Jones who brandished his bayonet with evil intent.

From the ver beginning it has been clear that Mann does not want to go in front of a jury, for obvious reasons as I've outlined above, he stands a good chance of the jury deciding the hockey stick is indeed fake, so isn't going to risk that. His intentions have always been to use the process to punish those who criticise him while avoiding discovery.

Nothing from our usual Mann-defenders? Looks like this development was so late in the day that the alarmist community haven't had the chance to get their defence story straight yet. No doubt it's all Tim Ball's fault...

Mark Hodgson, God was created in Mann's image, unfortunately a devilishly rogue programme designed the Earth's Climate, which is why Scientists can't model it, despite the billions they have had in fees.

Apparently, Global Warming was based on some Physics, and Climate Scientists have high confidence in their certainty. Any country bumpkin can remain clueless about physics, and yet observe little significant change, not exactly unprecedented throughout the written historical record.

Mark Hodgson

I rarely visit BH nowadays, and I have no plans to debate the matter, but I noticed your February 13th 8.40am question.

The only information available seems to be what Dr. Ball told PSI.

Entropic Man

Good to hear from you, although sorry (but not surprised) that you have no plans to debate the matter. You seemed rather gleeful earlier when telling us that the trial would commence on 17th February. That seemed to vindicate your suggestions that Mann is not keen on issuing proceedings just to intimidate critics, and then delaying trial to avoid making disclosure. But now that the trial start date is apparently being delayed, and the delay apparently comes from Mann's side (and you are apparently unable to come up with any evidence which suggests otherwise), where does this leave your view of Mann's litigious behaviour? Can't you even begin to suspect that we might be correct and that you might be a teeny weeny bit wrong about him?

EM, Mark Hodgson has offered a sensible suggestion for you to consider, based on his understanding of Law and human nature when confronted with adverse indicators.