TODAY: Michael Mann reduced to flogging his hockey stick at a SOCIOLOGY symposium at Oklahoma State University… I guess they paid him a lot of money??

Dr. Michael E. Mann Public Lecture – Sociology Symposium

Friday, February 22, 2013
3:30pm until 4:30pm in CST

Alumni Hall, Conoco-Phillips OSU Alumni Center
(near the OSU Student Union Building-which has paid parking and is located on the Southeast corner of campus)

A central figure in the controversy over human-caused climate change has been “The Hockey Stick,” a simple, easy-to-understand graph constructed to depict changes in Earth’s temperature back to 1000 AD. The graph was featured in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and it quickly became an icon in the debate over human-caused (“anthropogenic”) climate change. Dr. Mann will tell the story behind the Hockey Stick, using it as a vehicle for exploring broader issues regarding the role of skepticism in science, the uneasy relationship between science and politics, and the dangers that arise when special economic interests and those who do their bidding attempt to skew the discourse over policy-relevant areas of science.

on “Nobel Mann” see footnote 69, page 33:

Mann’s lawyers file counter motion against SLAPP motion of National Review

Mann loves his Hockey Stick

FYI: one of Robert Tamaki’s criticisms of the book in his one-star review at Amazon is that Mann never once mentions Montford’s name in the book.

He complains that Jolis does not mention the attacks he’s endured by politicians, and claims that’s the reason he wrote the book.

What you go to say is highly apposite. But Mann is also here, for me, putting all his critics in the ‘politician’ category, Steve McIntyre and Andrew Montford included. This enables him, he thinks, to ignore their most important arguments about the science or stats.

it occurs to me that I’ve wasted too much time deconstructing this letter . . .

Not for me. I’m with you about whether the book is worth much effort at all but as Mann is forced to face up to public criticism by the stature of the WSJ (not that he really did) I’m interested.

You’re also verballing him on the it doesn’t matter line. The context is that it doesn’t matter whether it’s right or wrong. The physics tells us that Climate Sensitivity is the important factor… Which makes me wonder why you are still talking about something more than 10 years old.

“So does the Hockey Stick matter? Yes, if you’re a climate scientist that believes that the IPCC is an important institution whose opinions should be valued.”

Truly!?!? The HS is what makes the IPCC important? It hardly featured in the fourth assessment…