Thought Piece

Dr. Michael Mann continues to communicate his point of view, with the confidence of the morally righteous. After hearing him testify at the Hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology in March, I thought he was uncivil, glib, and anti-intellectual.

Historically, Mann has tried to sue several people and media for “defamation” over the years: Anyone who was unkind to the science of his “Hockey Stick” graph or to him. In fact, Mann has been quoted saying “it is difficult to keep up with this dizzying ongoing assault on science.” And yet, Mann wouldn’t turn over the data he used for the basis of his famous study to a British Columbia Supreme Court, claiming the data was his intellectual property in spite of the fact that the U.S. taxpayer paid for his “Hockey Stick” Study.

Also, this withholding of data isn’t new for Mann and it fits a pattern used by the last EPA: If one has the noble cause of climate change, they don’t have to provide access to their data; Although, if the loyal opposition withholds data, they are accused of denying history.

Regardless of who is denying science, and the scientific method of open inquiry, there is no doubt who is denying civility.

Climate Alarmist Michael Mann Shrieks at ‘Inhuman Cretins’ for Skepticism

Climate alarmist Michael Mann smeared Investor’s Business Daily (IBD) as “inhuman cretins” after it wondered if climate change would get credit for Hurricane Irma being less severe than forecast.

IBD published an editorial on Sept. 11, wondering since so many tried to say Hurricane Irma would be a horrific storm because of climate change, would the same factor be invoked now?

“So will environmentalists credit climate change for Irma’s unexpected turn for the better?” IBD asked. Mann, who claimed the “effects of climate change” were “before us here and now” through Irma and Harvey, was outraged.

He labeled IBD’s editorial board “inhuman cretins” on Twitter and accused them of dismissing “loss of life & 0.3 Trillion$ damage.”

In spite of Mann’s accusation, IBD did acknowledge Irma’s devastation.

“There’s no question that Irma was and continues to be destructive. But there’s also no question that it was not nearly the storm it was predicted by all the experts to be,” IBD wrote.

Mann also called the IBD editorial board “inhuman & disgusting,” and demanded they apologize and resign. In one tweet, Mann incorrectly cited the International Business Times.

Irma struck the Florida Keys as a Category 4 hurricane on Sept. 10, but decreased in intensity as it barrelled over the state and was a tropical storm by the next morning. “Florida is drenched, tattered — but fortunate,” Bloomberg reported Sept. 11. “By one estimate, the cost of total damages dropped to $49 billion from $200 billion earlier.”

“Environmentalists and politicians were busy pinning the blame on global warming” when forecasts for Irma and Harvey were dire, IBD wrote, “So will environmentalists credit climate change for Irma’s unexpected turn for the better?”

IBD asked the question, not because they thought climate change was responsible: “Even if that were true — and, for the record, we aren’t saying it is — environmentalists wouldn’t admit it, because the only thing that never, ever gets linked to climate change is good weather.” The paper asked it to point out the double standard of only ever blaming dangerous or bad weather on global warming.

Economist Ross McKitrick pointed out that same tendency of alarmists in a Sept. 6, op-ed for The Washington Examiner.

Mann is a Meteorology professor at Penn State. He was responsible for the controversial “hockey stick” graph. The graph claimed to show a dramatic spike in global warming, but was based on “poor mathematics,” according to critics.

Leaked emails Mann sent in 1999 suggest he was also involved in data manipulation to “hide the decline” of temperature.

 At a commencement speech in May 2017, Mann described the “assault” on climate change science using the words of a Holocaust survivor.