Countering the Michael Mann Straw Man Arguments

strawmann-josh.jpg

Michael Mann is the scientific equivalent of FBI Agent Peter Strzok. (Click Here) Michael Mann has assumed a position of public trust and he has betrayed it on a Biblical Scale. (Click Here) Michael Mann is truly a despicable human being. (Click Here) He is a climate activist, a climate sophist masquerading as a legitimate scientist. (Click Here)

This post will review some of the sophistry tactics Michael Mann applied is a recent debate. (Click Here)

Strawman #1: “His presentation was based around the idea that the only debate to be had is on what to do about man-made climate change.”

That is pure nonsense. To properly address any issue one must properly identify the true cause of the problem. If a Dr. misdiagnoses an illness, the treatment may cause more harm than good. Michael Mann assumes CO2 is the cause of the warming that he manufactures in his “Hockey Stick” graph, however, given Michael Mann invented statistical manipulations like “Mike’s Nature Trick…to Hide the Decline,”no one knows better than Michael Mann that the warming is highly suspect. You don’t manipulate data sets if the data is giving you the answer you want.

Strawman #2: “Dr. Mann explained that the science behind anthropogenic climate change is verifiable fact. Incontrovertible.”

That is like claiming the earth is round. No one disagrees with that statement. Everyone agrees on the GHG Effect. That is easily demonstrated in a lab or simply lying under an IR Lamp. Those Red Lights used in restaurants to keep food warm are examples of this principle. The problem for Michael Mann is that CO2 thermalizes LWIR between 13 and 18µ and those wavelengths have very very very specific characteristics. According to MODTRAN CO2 has absolutely zero impact on the lower atmosphere when CO2 is doubled. That is because H2O saturates the absorption of those wavelengths in that atmospheric layer. (Click Here) The oceans are also warming, LWIR between 13 and 18µ doesn’t warm water. (Click Here) So even if we all accept that the globe is warming, we can’t claim it is due to CO2. To understand the climate you have to understand the oceans, and if you understand the oceans you don’t implicate CO2. (Click Here)

Strawman #3: “The point he made sure to emphasize with the hockey stick was the “warming spike” of the late 20th century is unnatural, and unprecedented in tens of thousands of years. He noted that 2014, 2015, and 2016 were each record-breaking years for global temperatures, and cited his 2017 paper which ostensibly demonstrated there was only a 1 in 3000 chance that three consecutive years of global warming would be due to natural causes.”

The first problem is that he implies that the “Hockey Stick” is an accurate temperature reconstruction. His own statistical “adjustments” proves that he knows that it isn’t an accurate reconstruction. You don’t apply “Mike’s Nature Trick…to Hide the Decline” if accuracy is the objective. Fortunately, like the recent IG Report reporting systemic corruption and bias in the FBI, we have the Climategate emails to know the truth. It is highly unlikely Michael Mann would ever have discussed his statistical methods in public without those email.

The second problem is that Michael Mann must be completely ignorant of the ice core data. Download any ice core data set and you will find that there is absolutely nothing unusual about the recent climate change when compared to the entire Holocene, and not just his Cherry Picked previous 1,000 years. (Click Here)

1aaa

BTW, temperatures fell during the Holocene when CO2 was increasing. Failing to mention relevant information is also one of Michael Mann’s favorite sophistry tactics.

1ac

In conclusion, to defeat Michael Mann in debates, people must understand his dishonest and despicable tactics. He is extremely dishonest and deceitful and seems to thrive in that environment. Lack of a conscious and any moral compass makes him difficult to debate, but by studying his tactics we at least have a chance. He has a huge ego, so calling him out on the countless flaws of his “renowned” research would likely throw him off his game. He is used to being the climate bully calling everyone “deniers” and worse. It is time to turn the table on Michael Mann and call him out as the charlatan that he is and expose his “research” as the garbage that it is.

Please Like, Share, Subscribe and Comment

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Countering the Michael Mann Straw Man Arguments”

  1. ” Everyone agrees on the GHG Effect.
    That is easily demonstrated in a lab or simply lying under an IR Lamp.
    Those Red Lights used in restaurants to keep food warm are examples of this principle. ”

    Sorry, but they are examples of direct IR radiation…. NOT GHG Effect.

    You say “Michael Mann must be completely ignorant of the ice core data”
    I doubt that;
    but he’s a cherry picker so ignores all data that disputes his theory.

    Your character assassination of Michael Mann is entirely correct,
    he is an utter disgrace & has damaged Science badly.

    Like

    1. Thanks for the comment. Please expand on your GHG effect comment. The IR Spectrometry is the evidence I use to demonstrate its existence. It is pretty well documented that gasses thermalizes LWIR.

      Like

  2. “It is pretty well documented that gasses thermalizes LWIR.”
    Absolutly but,
    An IR Lamp used in restaurants to keep food warm, is a direct scorce of electromagnetic radiation (like the sun).
    Part of the electromagnetic radiation is absorbed in the material, another portion is reflected and the rest penetrates the materials.
    Each material has its own absorption spectrum, the range in which the electromagnetic radiation is best absorbed.
    Only the absorbed portion contributes to heating.
    Heat lamp spectrum –
    https://proxy.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.hisupplier.com%2Fvar%2FuserImages%2F2017-02%2F20%2F110537437766.jpg&f=1

    Any gas molecules that become heated in the process, rise by convection…removing some heat.
    Any water molecules that become heated in the process, evaporate (cooling by latent heat) & rise by convection…removing some heat.

    ” simply lying under an IR Lamp” or ‘heating food with IR’ are examples of direct IR radiation…. NOT the GHG Effect.

    Regards

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s