Welcoming Committee Greets “Hide the Decline” Climate Warmist Michael Mann

michael_mann_welcome_wagonCreator of discredited “hockey stick” chart caused US, world much harm, say demonstrators

Dr. Michael Mann was welcomed to Minneapolis today by a group of demonstrators who blame Dr. Mann’s research and publications for damage to the US and world economies and fostering distrust in scientists. The demonstrators believe Mann’s oft-referenced work to prove anthropogenic global warming theory is fraudulent and showed up at the Minneapolis convention center where he was speaking at the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America to tell him so.

Mann was made infamous by discredited tree ring research used to create the so-called “hockey stick chart” that purported to demonstrate recent, runaway man-caused global warming. His name came up in the “climategate” email scandal that emerged out of the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia University, in connection to a “trick” employed by Dr. Mann for a paper published in Nature Magazine. That trick involved obfuscating the results of proxy temperature data when it didn’t match actual temperatures recorded by instrumentation. Discovery of that trick called into question the validity of the entire pre-instrumentation climate history constructed from Mann’s work.

The hockey stick chart was the key element in Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” and the United Nations’ 1997 Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change’s 4th Assessment. The IPCC report has been the underpinning of United States and global warming policy for over a decade. Based upon it’s conclusions, governments have implemented expensive carbon taxes and new overbearing regulations designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, cap and trade schemes, a phased-in ban on incandescent light bulbs, the forced relocation of whole populations of people to make room for carbon credit producing plantations and numerous other far reaching and expensive initiatives.

“There are several reasons for the current economic crisis we’re facing in the United States and globally, but a major contributor has been the suppression of energy production and economic activity by overbearing new regulations, taxes and carbon trading resulting from the misguided belief that anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions are causing extraordinary warming of the planet,” said Minnesota Majority president Jeff Davis. “We feel Dr. Mann’s work has contributed to tremendous economic and societal harm,” he said.

“Where did the medieval warming period go? What decline did he hide? What’s the Nature trick?” are the questions Minnesota Free Market Institute president Kim Crockett wants answers to.

Mann wasn’t available with answers.

Instead, Dr. Mann ironically spoke to the Geologic Society about how some climate scientists in the public arena are “attacked” by their opponents and about how climate scientists are “massively out-manned and out-funded in this battle.”

“His ‘poor me’ routine would be laughable in the face of the trillions of public dollars being poured into the green global warming toilet, if it weren’t for the part about trillions of public dollars being poured into the toilet,” said Davis. “These demonstrators aren’t being paid. In truth, they’re paying people like Mann and they’re turning our tax dollars against us, trying to get even more of our money.”

31 Responses to Welcoming Committee Greets “Hide the Decline” Climate Warmist Michael Mann

  1. Dan Pangburn October 12, 2011 at 4:14 pm #

    A simple equation based on the physical phenomena involved, with inputs of only sunspot number and ppmv CO2, calculates the average global temperatures (agt) since 1895 with 88.4% accuracy (87.9% if CO2 is assumed to have no influence). The equation, links to the source data, an eye-opening graph of the results and how they are derived are in the pdfs at http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&linkbox=true (see especially the pdfs made public on 4/10/10, 3/10/11 and 9/24/11). As shown in the 9/24/11 pdf, the equation accurately predicted the temperature trends for the last 20 years.

    The future average global temperature trend that this equation calculates is down. The huge effective thermal capacitance of the oceans (about 100 times everything else) will cause the decline to be only about 0.13°C per decade. The decline may be as much as 0.22°C per decade if the sun goes really quiet.

    This trend is corroborated by the growing separation between the rising CO2 and not-rising agt. From 2001 through September, 2011 the atmospheric CO2 increased by 23.7% of the total increase from 1800 to 2001 while the average global temperature has not increased. The 23.7% CO2 increase is the significant measurement, not the comparatively brief time period.

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD October 12, 2011 at 8:28 pm #

      I don’t think you’re going to be invited to the next global warming summit. Bravo!!!!!

  2. Joe October 12, 2011 at 8:19 pm #

    Interesting. Please keep us updated.

  3. Drewski October 13, 2011 at 12:39 am #

    Resonding to Dan: the sun HAS been quiet. In fact we have only just come out of a prolonged solar minimum which was the lowest minimum in recorded history and yet during that time we have seen 7 of the 8 hottest years in the historical record. Only 1998 (major El Nino year) was left out and 2005 and 2010 were tied for the all-time hottest. Interstingly, if you want to measure night-time temperatures, the higher overnight temps are trending up at a much sharper angle than daytime temps. What could cause that? Or if you want to measure the ratio of local cold weather records versus local hot weather records, then the US has gone from an average 1:1 ratio in the 70’s to 2.8:1 now (hot over cold). World wide measurements are tracking similarly.

    You see, scientists use many methods of measuring and that is why when someone throws out meaningless factoids such as “the world is cooling” based on a very short time period, you need to look deeper. Currently the confidence level for man-made global warming being real is at 90% based on a 30 year timeline, but if we continue to get warm monthly anomolies and more verifying evidence (retreating glaciers and Arctic Ice melt, etc) then it is likely we will see the confidence level raised to 95% by the time we have the next IPCC .

    • knowsit October 13, 2011 at 7:32 pm #


      I do not know where you are getting your data, but the warmer weather station and temperature measurement have two primary reasons.
      The first one is that the James Hanson and corrupt cohorts are not longer measuring ground based temperatures on the 6,000 stations measured earlier, but only on some 159 or so, and the coldest locations on earth have been eliminated completely, substituted more accessible stations, with the readings “corrected ” for the new locations.
      Corrected by James Hansen? Somehow my confidence in this not overflowing.

      The remaining temperature stations are increasingly located in urban, The locations may be the same, but the encroaching urban enviri=onment makes these stations increasingly subject to Urban Heat Islands.

      On the other hand, satellite based measurements are not affected by Hansen’s manipulation, and they show far less increases, in some areas decreases in temperatures.

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD October 13, 2011 at 8:29 pm #

      Are you using the 2009 NCAR study?
      “The NCAR Study contains at least two biases:
      1.The selection of 1950 through 2006 significantly biases the outcome of this study because the U.S. was entering a cooling period in the 1960s and 1970s which creates the illusion of unusual subsequent warming from 1980 through 2006.
      2.During the last decade, a large reduction of rural reporting stations in the U.S. has biased records toward urbanized and urbanizing areas. Land use changes as well as deterioration of urban siting versus NOAA standards [http://www.surfacestations.org/] have resulted in a bias toward over-reporting/erroneous reporting of high temperature records and an under-reporting of low temperature records.”

      The official record of temperatures in the continental United States comes from a network of 1,221 climate-monitoring stations overseen by the National Weather Service, a department of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Until now, no one had ever conducted a comprehensive review of the quality of the measurement
      environment of those stations.

      During the past few years I recruited a team of more than 650 volunteers to visually inspect and photographically document more than 860 of these temperature stations. We were shocked by what we found.

      We found stations located next to the exhaust fans of air conditioning units, surrounded by asphalt parking lots and roads, on blistering-hot rooftops, and near sidewalks and buildings that absorb and radiate heat. We found 68 stations located at wastewater treatment plants, where the process of waste digestion causes temperatures to be higher than in surrounding areas.

      In fact, we found that 89 percent of the stations – nearly 9 of every 10 – fail to meet the National Weather Service’s own siting requirements that stations must be 30 meters (about 100 feet) or more away from an artificial heating or radiating/ reflecting heat source.

      In other words, 9 of every 10 stations are likely reporting higher or rising temperatures because they are badly sited.

  4. Dan Pangburn October 14, 2011 at 1:05 pm #


    If you had said ‘for about a century’ instead of “in recorded history” you would be closer to right. The solar low around 1913 was somewhat longer.

    However, noticing that temperatures have been warm the last decade or so is about as profound as saying that you drove 10,000 miles last year and the last 10 days were among the greatest distance traveled since the beginning of the year. Saying they are the warmest on record can be misleading since the ‘record’ starts with the planet emerging from the LIA.

    …“you need to look deeper.” If YOU had ‘looked deeper’ you might have noticed the equation that calculates temperatures since 1895 with 88% accuracy and that it has accurately predicted temperatures for the last 20 years . . . and counting.

    You have been deceived by a linear regression of the last 30 full years which ended with the 2010 El Nino. How this deception happens is discussed under ‘Temperature Trends’ on page 11 of the pdf made public 4/10/10 at http://climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=145&linkbox=true

    The agt has dropped since 2010 with the average through August, 2011 shown as the most recent data point on the page 5 graph in the pdf made public 9/24/11 (September is looking lower). Temperatures went up for the first 20 of the 30 years but have been flat for the latest decade. The links are provided so you can check it yourself.

    Ice melts because it’s warmer than it was when the water froze. It says nothing about whether the temperature is rising or falling.

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD October 14, 2011 at 8:29 pm #

      I don’t think you’re going to convert Drewski. What I think is that the temperature record has been severely damaged by people who believe in AGW running the institutions that give us the temperature record. None of it is trustworthy in my opinion.

  5. Joe October 15, 2011 at 9:31 pm #

    Drewski has had too many “brewskies” by the Al Gore minions. Kool Aid they call it? Call it what you want. You cannot convert a Drewski type. They have their own agenda and will never ever listen to the other side of the equation. Never have and never will. Watch MSNBCTV. I gave up with discourse with opposing views after almost 50 years. To busy with their laptops. I pads. social networks as to what they baked that day, places to occupy for a cause that they have no idea what they are talking about other than they are with their “social” facebook friends. Ask them to state why they are there, response is “What? Can I check the net?” Ignorance I understand. Being a lemming following their leaders over the cliff I cannot nor will ever understand. I have not see individuality in America for years. Just see All with hands out stretched for equality in what they believe is how we should live, how much we can earn and finally how ignorant we shall become because it make us “feel good being equal,” doesn’t it? I don’t, do you? Thank God my family works hard, two jobs for my young daughter who is debt free, my other doing same. Do they complain? No, their parents did the same for the last 50 years ago. Called the American way. We have lost that spirit in my opinion and I sincerely hope and pray that the work ethic of America someday returns.

  6. Rob N. Hood October 16, 2011 at 9:17 am #

    If you think the lack of a work ethic is what ails the US it is you who have a failed agenda and lack of clarity. US worker’s productivity has only been increasing, steadily, without corresponding pace of compensation for at least 2 dacades now, actually probably since the early 80’s or late 70’s. And people are only now starting to complain, as well they should. The upper one percenters give or take have increased their wealth by leaps and bounds. Not exactly what America was supposed to be all about. You are defending, ultimately, the very anti-American, anti-democratic forces that are causing this problem. But you know better… GOP= Greedy One Percent.

  7. Joe October 16, 2011 at 11:21 pm #

    Give me facts not dribble about work ethic, et al, not your feelings/emotions/union ties. Simply facts. We are all awaiting because we all want to know if we are so ignorant. Impatiently waiting. Let us all know.

  8. Joe October 18, 2011 at 10:08 pm #

    In 1980 84% on the populace paid Taxes. In 2011 46%. What percent are you? When is the last product that you purchased stating “Made in America?” GM, Chrysler, Ford et al? Almost all are made in Mexico, Canada etc. Oh that’s right Detroit? Now do you understand the problem? Finally, in Wisconsin after the union fiasco a city found that the unions were using one Insurance company dictated by the unions. After finding they could now shop for other Insurance companies for health care their premiums dropped in half! Wonder why? Absent competition the insurance companydictated prices. Not now! With competition, your bid goes down to be competitive. Funny how that works isn’t it? Economics 101.

  9. Rob N. Hood October 20, 2011 at 1:52 pm #

    Joe I only dribble on the basketball court… or in bed while sleeping.

  10. Joe October 20, 2011 at 7:07 pm #

    Mr. Hood, why is the government, compliments of our President/Vice President outsourcing electric cars to Finland??? Have you a definitive answer for the unemployed car workers? This was a commitment by Obama’s administration in 2009. By the way, the company is owned by Al Gore and Obama’s funding cronies. Please explain if you are voting for the community organizer! That’s all he has been good for. Organizing chaos to the economy as well as deviding the country.

  11. Rob N. Hood October 27, 2011 at 4:36 pm #

    Oh so Obama now tells the mighty GM how to do it’s business? Really? A lowly community organizer? No kidding?! Have some more bong water… While your at it, contact ALL of the companies who’ve out-sourced jobs elsewhere and tell them Obama sucks. Might take you awhile…

  12. Rob N. Hood October 27, 2011 at 4:36 pm #

    Oh so Obama now tells the mighty GM how to do it’s business? Really? A lowly community organizer? No kidding?! Have some more bong water… While your at it, contact ALL of the companies who’ve out-sourced jobs elsewhere and tell them Obama stinks. Might take you awhile…

  13. Joe October 29, 2011 at 12:52 am #

    I see you repeat yourself. Are you medicated? On drugs you have full knowledge of in previous posts? Simply curious for all of the viewers on this site? Let me know. I’m curious. It would explain your verbiage and behavior. It now makes sense.

  14. Rob N. Hood October 31, 2011 at 6:32 pm #

    Aww gee Joe… you sure try hard to be insulting. Maybe you should try to respond a bit more rationally. Even a rational insult would be better, or worse, rather. Get my point? Or do you wish to angrily disagree with this bit o’constructive criticism. Look- I’m helping you to better insult me. How generous is that?! Answer: very.

  15. Joe October 31, 2011 at 8:49 pm #

    Just like talking to my grandson.

  16. Rob N. Hood November 3, 2011 at 6:25 pm #

    And that has what to do with what? Try picking up on his good manners. It might help. In the meantime you should not try to insinuate drug abuse by another, when you yourself appear to be incoherant. Apparently it comes naturally to you, since you have indicated you don’t use/abuse drugs. Thus I cannot recommend NA, or even AA, unless…..

  17. Joe November 3, 2011 at 10:41 pm #

    Demeaning someone is your forte isn’t it? Sound like your a “Mama’s boy'”. Sheltered life?

  18. Rob N. Hood November 4, 2011 at 4:57 pm #

    And so what’s your excuse? I am simply responding directly to you, in defense actually. Got a problem with that? If so why? Don’t you do the same? You also are actively offensive. So again, what is your excuse?

  19. joe November 8, 2011 at 12:26 am #

    Only have one problem. Dealing with an individual such as you. If that is an “excuse” please excuse others as well. Man, when will you grow up? It is not AA, et al it is understanding reality. Is there such a place for the liberals? Cuba perhaps?

  20. Rob N. Hood November 8, 2011 at 5:43 pm #

    Wow… you disparage yourself MUCH MUCH MUCH more than you do me. I don’t think you can even comprehend that- and therein lies the comedy (or the tragedy) of these pathetic little communications…. I am just as guilty, of that anyway. Making fun of the monkey behind the bars….

  21. Joe November 8, 2011 at 10:19 pm #

    When you guit beating your dog I will let up. Have you? Similiar to Mr. Cains connundrum?

  22. Rob N. Hood November 15, 2011 at 5:44 pm #

    Gosh Joe, again with the deep thoughts and riddles. Can’t you set aside your intellectual aresenal just for a little while???!!!

  23. Rob N. Hood November 17, 2011 at 6:16 pm #

    Guess not. Damn!

  24. Joe November 25, 2011 at 10:35 pm #

    Hate that word.

  25. Zach December 5, 2011 at 12:34 pm #

    Well, you only got a couple things wrong….

    You referred to the hockey stick chart being a key element to….the IPCC 4th assessment in 1997. The 4th assessment was actually published in 2007 and the hockey stick chart was first published in the 3rd assessment (2001).

    Also, tree rings were used as a proxy to predict very early global temperatures. Even if you ignore the tree ring data, the average global temperatures, as of recently, are much higher than they have been historically.

    I guess this goes to show how misinformed the author is….

  26. Rob N. Hood December 9, 2011 at 8:52 am #

    Thanks Zach- better late than never. But these people are programmed to view reality one way only. Kind of frightening really. But thankfully, at most, they comprise, I believe, one third of the population.


  1. Welcoming Committee Greets "Hide The Decline" Climate Alarmist Michael Mann. - October 13, 2011

    […] Read more at Global Climate Scam … […]

A project of Minnesota Majority, hosted and maintained by Minnesotans for Global Warming.