GC

What have I posted that is factually wrong? Happy to retract and correct if you can provide an example.

Aug 29, 2019 at 10:05 AM | Phil Clarke

You could start here, for the number of incompetents depending on Mann

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/discussion/post/2679271
"Mann continued to refuse and abandoned the article.

Even if this self-serving tosh were true, so what? A single pulled article.

I guess Dr Mann's self-esteem will have to depend purely on his 200 peer-reviewed articles, his listing by Scientific American as 'one of the fifty leading visionaries in science and technology', his winning of the John Russell Mather Paper of the Year award, his Hans Oeschger medal his 
status as distinguished professor in Penn State's College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, his winning of the National Wildlife Federation's National Conservation Achievement Award for Science, his Fellowships of the  American Association for the Advancement of Science and the AMS and his Stephen H. Schneider Award for Outstanding Science Communication.

Et Alia.

Stephen McIntyre lies on his blog.

My advice: exercise wisdom when choosing your heroes.

Jul 15, 2017 at 1:11 AM | Phil Clarke"

Suggest you apologise to Stephen McIntyre

If you can tell me the title of the paper, demonstrate that Dr Mann did indeed refuse data, and abandon it, I will be only too happy to retract and apologise.

Just off the top of my head

https://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2014/09/22/steve-mcintyre-misrepresents-climate-research-history
https://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2009/12/11/steve-mcintyre-down-in-the-quo

'Steve has an amnesia. I had sent him these data at February 2, 2004 on his demand.

Rashit Hantemirov, responding to another of McIntyre's claims of being denied data.

From <http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2012/05/yamalian-yawns/>

https://tinyurl.com/y4a2zxjg

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2010/02/close-encounters-of-the-absurd-kind/

(scroll down to 'Climate Auditing – Close Encounters with Mr. Steven McIntyre')

Aug 29, 2019 at 12:29 PM | Phil Clarke

Posting links to the discredited Real Climate, set up by Michael Mann and his personal propaganda, lies and disinformation enforcer William M Connolley?

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/13/wikipedia-turbo-revisionism-by-william-connolley-continues/

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/30/wikipedia-climate-fiddler-william-connolley-is-in-the-news-again/

Please see the thread 'WUWT propaganda'. I intended to keep it up to date but it's like sampling a stormdrain in full flood. Most recently he repeated John O' Sullivan's lies about the Mann/Ball case.

Please see Connolley's riposte to the nonsense reposted by Watts https://wmconnolley.wordpress.com/2010/01/04/a-childs-garden-of-wikipedia-p/

"If you can tell me the title of the paper, demonstrate that Dr Mann did indeed refuse data, and abandon it, I will be only too happy to retract and apologise.
Aug 29, 2019 at 12:06 PM | Phil Clarke"

The internet confirms you peddle dishonesty and lies

"Here

Actually, it is the Gergis Australia study, Joelle and her team have corrected the various issue and resubmitted the study and it has been reviewed and accepted, in the face of the usual denier unpleasantness.

Conclusion:"Overall, we are confident that observed temperatures in Australasia have been warmer in the past 30 years than every other 30-year period over the entire millennium (90% confidence based on 12,000 reconstructions, developed using four independent statistical methods and three different data subsets). Importantly, the climate modelling component of our study also shows that only human-caused greenhouse emissions can explain the recent warming recorded in our region."

Add it to the list.

Jul 11, 2016 at 10:46 PM | Phil Clarke"

The sooner Trump defunds the IPCC the better.

Not the same paper.

And William Connolley had nothing to do with the articles I posted, and indeed left the RC team some time before 2004.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/contributors/

Aug 29, 2019 at 12:29 PM | Phil Clarke
Here is the list you linked to, of those tarnished by trying to preserve Mann's ego.

http://environmentalforest.blogspot.com/2013/10/enough-hockey-sticks-for-team.html

If any would like to find the MWP and LIA, now would be a good time to ignore Mann's ego.

Aug 29, 2019 at 2:59 PM | Phil Clarke

Total Real Climate irrelevance. Untrustworthy and Unreliable too.
Shame none of them got honest when they had the chance.

Ah yes. The Alberta version of 28gate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danielle_Smith#Background"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danielle_Smith#Background"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danielle_Smith#Background

Keeping Phil busy putting out fires.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/08/michael_manns_treering_circus.html

The CRU Mails

Like an Aristophanes satire, like Hamlet, it opens with two slaves, spear-carriers, little people. Footsoldiers of history, two researchers in a corrupt and impoverished mid-90s Russia schlep through the tundra to take core samples from trees at the behest of the bigger fish in far-off East Anglia. Stepan and Rashit don't even have their own e-mail address and like characters in some absurdist comedy must pass jointly under the name of Tatiana M. Dedkova. Conscientious and obliging, they strike a human note all through this drama. Their talk is of mundane material concerns, the smallness of funds, the expense of helicopters, the scramble for grants. They are the ones who get their hands dirty, and their vicissitudes periodically revived my interest during the slower stretches of the tale, those otherwise devoted to abstruse details of committee work and other longueurs. 'We also collected many wood samples from living and dead larches of various ages. But we were bited by many thousands of mosquitos especially small ones.' They are perhaps the only likeable characters on the establishment side, apart from the exasperated and appalled IT man Harry in the separate 'Harry_read_me' document, and I cheered up whenever they appeared. 'Slaves' is horseshit, and 'footsoldiers' insulting, but if scientists are allowed to put a creative spin on facts, I can certainly do so. They are respected scientists: in fact, it emerges, eminent or destined to be eminent. But they talk funny and are at the beck and call of CRU, are financially dependent on them; when the film is made they will be comedy relief, played by Alexei Sayle and the dopey one out of The Fast Show.

In the early parts of the story those who are to become the bigger players are not much better off, though. The mails start in 1996 when they have not yet attained world fame and the ear of statesmen, and often do not know where their next grant is coming from. There are moments of poignance:

As always I seem to have been away bullshiting and politiking in various meetings for weeks! I try to convince myself that this is of use to us as a dendrochronological community but I am not so sure how much that is really true these days.

[0846715553]

From: Keith Briffa <k.briffa@uea.ac.uk>
To: tatm@insec.quorus.e-burg.su
Subject: the Yamal data
Date: Wed Oct 30 17:45:53 1996

Dear Rashit,
As always I seem to have been away bullshiting and politiking in
various meetings for weeks! I try to convince myself that this is of use to us as a dendrochronological community but I am not so sure how much that is really
true these days. I have the data you sent and I had to get someone here to
decode it for me . That is fine now so I would like to try and reformat and RCS it . I will be back in touch soon. Your paper is in review for Denrochronologia.
I am very keen to get a much more detailed paper in The Holocene dealing with
this stuff and I hope you and Stepan will consider this - perhaps for some time in spring next year. Sorry I wasn't in touch sooner. Please give my regards
to Stepan and Valerie.
very best wishes
Keith

http://michaelkelly.artofeurope.com/cru.htm

Far from being a clear win for the deniers, the ruling appears to be more a judgement of the state of Tim Ball: a broken down old man, who’s lucky that no one takes his conspiratorial and accusatory ramblings seriously.

And that’s what his own defense said about him!

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/8/28/1881956/-Tim-Ball-Pleads-For-Mercy-As-An-Irrelevant-Sick-Old-Man-Gets-It-Declares-Victory

Not exactly the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

I am currently available for hire to do almost anything, up to and including murder and chicken-sodomy.

http://michaelkelly.artofeurope.com/

Phil, you don't do yourself justice. Give it up and accept that the ruling is a judgment on the state of Mann's Court case, namely that after 8 years it wasn't even anywhere near ready for trial (if it was close to being ready for trial I very much doubt that the Judge would have thrown it out).

Why were Mann and his time pursuing this case in such a determinedly leisurely way? They certainly weren't in a hurry to be awarded with a judgment vindicating his claim against Ball. Why not?

I have a lot of experience of litigation, though my experience was gained as a generalist involved in litigation from time to time, not as a specialist litigator. Nevertheless, I have NEVER known a case take so long to get to trial, not even a case of extraordinary complexity. To my mind, the inordinate delay speaks volumes, and it doesn't reflect well on Mann, IMO.

Ball is not one of my heroes, and I express no views on the merits of the issues in the case. Nevertheless, the way the case has failed to progress, and its appropriate denouement, plus Mann's feeble attempts to spin the meaning of all this, do say something, to my mind, about Mann. I think you should be more careful in selecting your heroes.

Give it up and accept that the ruling is a judgment on the state of Mann's Court case,

Inter Alia. It is the case that Ball asked the judge to take his health and low impact on public opinion into account.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165679422676115456

Phil. Your comment that Tim Ball had a "low impact on public opinion" doesn't really fit with his membership of the Nature Communications infamous denialist hit list, where is is placed #44, no less. These infamous contrariae were identified as getting more media coverage than scientists. So which is it? Both views cannot be true but you seem to have supported both on this blog.

Aug 29, 2019 at 2:14 PM | Phil Clarke

Your continued discharge of Hockey Teamster effluent has polluted Climate Science.

Demonstrating that Hockey Teamsters hold Law and the development of science in contempt, does seem to be a risky strategy should evidence be required and deliberately withheld, from a Nation's Lawmakers and/or Enforcement Agencies.

Claiming to act on behalf of the UN's IPCC, and under "Diplomatic Immunity", may not provide any legal defence.

It was Ball, rather than me, arguing his lack of influence (and hence inability to damage Mann's reputation) and mainly in relation to the alleged libel. He cited the low Alexa score for his website (taken offline now, apparently) and the fact that his name appeared in fewer than 8% of Google searches on Mann and his research.

Aug 30, 2019 at 11:56 AM | Phil Clarke
Be careful that you don't admit that Mann's vexatious and deliberately delayed litigation was ruining Tim Ball's health, and this was acknowledged by the Court.

But Phil it was you that were more than willing to accept and quote from Tim Ball's statements to suggest that he had no influence, but also to accept rankings that purportedly demonstrated the opposite. As I wrote earlier, you can't have both ways, so which do you believe? Does Ball have influence or not?

Aug 30, 2019 at 1:22 PM | Phil Clarke
As you keep digging Mann's hole, more Climate Science keeps falling in.

AK - Remind me where I did or said these things?

Phil

Can you explain the reason for what seem to be inexplicable delays in pursuing his litigation?

You have a blind spot here, IMO.