Monday
Jan162012
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Mann of Independent means
Jan 16, 2012 Climate: HSI Climate: Mann Steve Connor, the science editor of the Independent has written something of a hagiography of the Hockeystickmeister today.
You would have thought a serious journalist would want to delve into the aspects of Mann's character that were revealed by the emails. As it is, the article reads more like a press release than a serious attempt to analyse its subject.
There's no mention of the Hockey Stick Illusion (surprise, surprise!). I wonder how many of the reviews of Mann's new book will not mention it?
Reader Comments (44)
They're circling the wagons to defend the cause, and if it means sacrificing all integrity then that's what they'll jolly well have to do!
Re: FarleyR
You are making an assumption for which there is no evidence.
You are assuming that they have integrity to start with.
TerryS, I think we run the risk of sounding like tin foil hat-wearing conspiracy theorists aka denialists here. I genuinely don't understand what someone hopes to achieve with such an obviously Mann-oriented puff piece? Back on our side of the argument, unfortunately just being right doesn't mean that we will get your way - especiallyif those with influence and power "hide the decline" and then lie about what "hide the decline" actually means, then all is pretty much lost I'm afraid. Luckily as I'm sponsored by big oil (as we all are here) and so I'm just going to fly off to the mountains in my private jet where I'll be safe from the relentlessly rising oceans. See you there!
Quote from Mann:
"Scientists have to recognise that they are in a street fight," he warns.
Discussion was never his strong point. Who was the Climate Scientist who said he'd like to beat the crap out of Patrick Micheals....
The article is pretty much what you'd expect if Mann was allowed to approve the content -- assuming he didn't actually write it himself.
Certainly, all his favourite talking points are there, quite unchallenged.
What is at stake are reputations and careers. Mann and Hansen [also Lacis to a certain extent] are coming out fighting. Trenberth who by now must realise his belief in 'back radiation' was misplaced despite it coming from Arrhemius, is apparently back-tracking like mad. This is echoed in the recent conversion by Curry to the thermodynamic cause and Spencer is wavering, apparently.
The split is three ways. Those who have fiddled data have nowhere to go. Those who made mistakes which led to leadership are preparing escape routes. The remaining people are showing signs of trying to catch up with the information coming from experts outside climate science which has been so poorly led it has developed critical science failures.
As for the politicians, the WASPs are quietly dumping this corrupt science on the advice of independent scientists and engineers.
The most interesting part of the story will be how the UK scientific establishment reacts now it has been shown up to have failed in its job of providing objective and accurate advice to politicians and civil service [which has done an appallingly unprofessional job by totally failing to consider the professional engineering of its plans].
It seems that this week we'll know the answer as hopefully the first of a series of UK dominoes starts to fall: the alternative is a Third World future with mass emigration of the best.
"a very successful, well-planned smear campaign intended ... to go directly at the trust the public had in scientists," Mann insists.
No, no, it's pseudoscientists that are the problem: those who make wild assertations based on flimsy or bent data. Real science has clear falsifiability criteria. Scientists who say, "If I'm wrong, and real-world data refute my hypothesis I will gladly concede" have integrity.
Connor has to some degree turned the Independent into a laughing stock. Just read the comments under the CAGW articles. It was actually a decent paper, until the front page, single issue, "end of the world" stories started to appear in the noughties.
There is no going back for him. He has invested too much of his professional integrity into the CAGW scare.
Remember he is Science Editor, not Environmental Editor. That is a big difference. The Greenie Journos have been shown to be never wrong, they just mutate onto the next bandwagon.
A science editor is judged by much more strict rules. He is going down with the ship.
Effortlessly defaecated by Mann, swallowed and regurgitated in bite-sized chunks by Connor.
mydogsgotnonose: "the first of a series of UK dominoes starts to fall"
Forgive my ignorance, but which particular domino would you be refering to here?
....... as ever with the CGAW bandwagon, the past becomes cooler, the present warmer and the future hotter.
Lets all respond with a double positive, "Yeah, right"
Thanks to CG1 and CG2 no one now believes is such errant nonsense.
This is publicity for his book.
Mann doesn't have to worry - a lot will be buying his book. #2 selling on Amazon's Environmentalism list - and the book is not even out. It is expensive though ($28). 28 dollars to read how he gave an excel sheet when asked for a text file? I think I'll wait.
Don
Raise the tone a bit please!
Indeed, any serious journalist would have delved - but this is Steve Connor, the man who wrote in an 'exclusive' in 2008,
"It seems unthinkable, but for the first time in human history, ice is on course to disappear entirely from the North Pole this year."
Sorry Bish!
I did refrain from the use of expletives, but felt that coprophagy was an apt description of Connor's relationship with Mann.
matthu; I'll give you a clue about the first domino.
Its name is very similar to the German for 'chicken'!
Most journalism is just rewriting press releases from government departments, quangos, fakecharities or the great and genocidal anyway. It is a lot easier and bearing in mind our libel laws, safer than looking for real news.
mydogsgotnonose:
I hope you are right. That would make my day and my week.
Oh come on you guys. This is the Independent after all, the only relevant question is whether it is worse than the Guardian.
We can only expect from either of them the same standard of objectivity that would be required of a Pravda hack writing a eulogy of Stalin on the occasion of his birthday in 1950.
It reads like a straight press release form Mann's agent . not s singly worthwhile question and no details on Mann's 'problems ' but the usual digs at fossil fuel interests etc . In other words total BS with Connor bending over over for Mann.
"28 dollars to read how he gave an excel sheet when asked for a text file? I think I'll wait."
Funny, that one.
Not only is the HSI not mentioned. Neither is Steve McIntyre. It all seems to be politically-motivated mudslinging from the sceptics.
Prof. Mann seems to revel in being a persecuted prophet. But for me Matt 7.15-20 is pertinent.
Well, considering his very minor "contributions" to the MSNBC program - and over-hyped mentions by Chris "motormouth" Hayes (first time I've ever watched an MSNBC program, and am not impressed!) ... my guess would be that Mann may well have gone overboard in his book.
This particular creative whining exercise for The Independent has give us two new words we must add to the ever-lengthening list that must be redefined if we are to appreciate and understand the lingo of noble "climate scientists":
"a serious journalist would want to delve into the aspects of Mann's character that were revealed by the emails." This is where Bishop Hill's analysis goes seriously off the rails.
Where I come from it's bad manners to read someone's private correspondence, so the logical conclusion that could be drawn from doing so is that the person intercepting the correspondence is of questionable character.
That's good Hengist.
Do you consider it bad manners to call people who disagree with you things like moron, subvert peer review because they publish an article you don't agree with etc etc etc. You should be concerned with the content of the e-mails and you should also be very concerned about the use of inappropiate proxies, such as bristlecone pines and the Tiljander series. Until you start condemning the use of these proxies your presence here will always be one of amusement.
"Mann's new book"
Something for him to read in jail, if the DA gets his way!
Hengist - I possess a copy of this book
The Letters of Ernest Hemingway: Volume 1, 1907-1922
ISBN-13: 978-0521897334
Is it rude of me to read the contents?
It's all about money and - admittedly, tacky - prestige, not science.
There's money in them thar (s)hills.
Context is everything . There's a huge difference between calling someone a denigrating term publicly and confiding with person A that person B is in one's opinion a denigrating term . Advocates positioned as skeptics are turning private correspondences public here and suggesting the authors should be judged in the context that the emails were public statements. But they weren't public statements, and advocates positioned as skeptics apparently see no ethical dilemmas in looking at private emails. There's a logical fallacy in the position adopted by advocates positioned as skeptics. It's like a pickpocket berating his victim for what he finds in his wallet.
Hengist, what if the “private” emails between members of the BNP were released onto the net? Or the “private” emails between Blair and Bush at the time of the Iraq war? Would you still be of the same view? Or would that somehow be “different”?
Hengist - I would have no problem with my work communications being viewed - they are conveying information for which I am being paid and are not my property, unlike my private ones.
It is the team whose manners have let them down, not ours.
Manic
“Matt 7.15-20”
Verses 3-5 are pretty apposite, too.
I like the bit about the cheesemakers in Chapter 5 best.. :-)
Hengist
Perhaps I missed it, but I don't remember reading you condemning Wikileaks and Julian Assange.
If you don't subscribe to the same double standards so many on the left do, perhaps you would be kind enough to point us to that statement.
James P
I agree. I work in the Space Industry as a Test Engineer - part of the IT policy at my company states that any E-Mail which contains a customer name or project can be viewed by that customer as part of an audit process. We have a rule of thumb where by we do not write anything in an internal e-mail which may embarass us later. Too my knowledge no customer has ever asked to see our E-Mails. I have very little sympathy for Mann and co, given there education and the privileged positions they have obtained, the behaviour they have shown is shameful and not what you would expect of learned gentleman.
So you want to discuss bristlecone pines, Wikileaks Julian Assange and Ernest Hemingway.
Oh dear. Andrew Montford's hyperbolic claim that the character of Dr Mann could be 'revealed' by looking at the hacked emails is something you don't want to discuss and looking very shaky indeed.
as usual, Hengist, your reading comprehension skills are sadly lacking.
"You would have thought a serious journalist would want to delve into the aspects of Mann's character that were revealed by the emails"
Where is the hyperbolic claim in that? As I read it, it merely says that the emails reveal aspects of Mann's character. That is obviously and trivially true. To repeat, no claim is being made. Perhaps you could state what claims are being made before you make another of your anti-Bishop, self-serving posts at your blog.
So Bishop Hill is not making a claim but his claim is obviously true. And you guys call yourselves skeptics too ROTFL
what claim, Hengist?
Except that the emails weren't private, were they? Daft...
Mark
So... in order for the hengist mcfallacy to hold, he needs to find a way to prove his premiss is not actually false. Logic: a tough subject for most.
Mark
diogenes
It's not his blog, it's the Bishop's. I only wish Hengist and Zed would get their own - it would be fascinating to see their attempts at original thought!
James P
Be careful in what you wish for:
http://muchachoverde.blogspot.com/
Hengist's blog, his readership going by the number of comments seems to be limited. I suspect he's more than a little jealous of the Bishop.
James P, from what I have read, the Hengist blog consists simply of slinging mud at the Bishop, mostly as a result of his lack of reading comprehension skills.
"Be careful in what you wish for"
Indeed - I'd forgotten he'd already got one!
If only he would devote more time to that and less to this...