Comments on: Vignettes before MM2003

By: MrPete

MrPete — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 04:08:49 +0000

Re: Edgar Walsh (Apr 15 08:34), (You are misinterpreting Spencer -- he simply came up with his own attribution for the warming. Quite a different thing than denying warming in the first place. But this is OT.)

By: Edgar Walsh

Edgar Walsh — Sun, 15 Apr 2012 13:34:37 +0000

Still living in the past Steve? Any comments on Spencers’ continuing self deception? Mann is sounding a lot more right about the science than Spencer. It is warming, Spencer can’t even admit to that.

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2012/04/15/roy-spencer-man-of-mystery/#comment-60646

By: blogollum

blogollum — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 13:39:39 +0000

You are an inspiration.

By: Pooh, Dixie

Pooh, Dixie — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 14:43:05 +0000

Re: “a material “fudge” (my term; “bodge” is the CRU term)”. “Munge” is also a good word, and strangely satisfying to use.

By: Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup | Watts Up With That?

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup | Watts Up With That? — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 23:33:55 +0000

[...] http://climateaudit.org/2012/03/19/vignettes-before-mm2003/ [...]

By: John A

John A — Sat, 24 Mar 2012 16:42:29 +0000

Thanks Steve.

Yes Mann and Schmidt’s pre-emptive strikes were certainly the reasons why I implored you to start blogging in order to give immediate rebuttal to an avalanche of lies.

It’s interesting to see that Mann, who at that time knew nothing about me, was nonetheless quick to portray me as a “shill” and had recommended strategies for rejecting emails.

It is an axiom of human psychological study that all of human behaviour is a response to a perceived problem. In this case, what did you do that precipitated Mann cutting off all contact with you when all you were doing was verifying the file sent to you?

Answer: Mann could not continue having any sort of conversation with you after Scott Rutherford made the terrible mistake of sending you that pcproxy.txt file. Mann had had to break off all contact after Rutherford’s howler dropped Mann, Bradley and Hughes right in it.

All of Mann’s subsequent behaviour came from this one moment. And although you didn’t know it at the time, Mann was petrified that you’d find out what had really been going on at UMass in 1997 and 1998.

By: barn E. rubble

barn E. rubble — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 11:21:02 +0000

RE:” . . . the UVA told ATI that they do not have emails after Feb 2003. Thus nothing from our period.”

Dr. Rutherford was working for the University of Rhode Island/Roger Williams University during that time, was he not? I suppose being almost a decade ago, your interest in pursuing FOI’s has diminished somewhat . . .

By: Steve McIntyre

Steve McIntyre — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:36:31 +0000

I was wondering about doing my own FOI for correspondence with Rutherford. However, a couple of weeks ago, the UVA told ATI that they do not have emails after Feb 2003. Thus nothing from our period.

By: barn E. rubble

barn E. rubble — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:24:00 +0000

From his first ‘I’ve got a story’, it reads as tho Mann is actually looking at an Excel doc . . . from who/where it came from doesn’t seem clear. But placing blame is very clear.

“At this point, I knew that’s what Scott must have done. But I had to confirm. I simply had to contact Scott, and ask him: Scott, when you prepared that excel file for these guys, you don’t suppose by any chance that you might have….
And, well, I think you know the answer.”

http://foia2011.org/index.php?id=4692

Well, actually we don’t, Mike. A very cleaver way of having Rutherford seemingly admit guilt without actually doing so. I’m assuming at some point you (Steve &/or Ross) had direct contact w/Dr. Rutherford to clarify this Excel file issue . . . or no? I can’t find any CG correspondence between Mann and Rutherford other than the ‘Tell us what you told them’ Nov 12 email above. Would this be within the time frame of FOI’s (Mann @UVa)?

By: Christopher Chantrill

Christopher Chantrill — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 04:03:52 +0000

When you are frame things in terms of good vs. evil, as Mann seems always to do, then you are not doing science. You are doing religion. And Mann seems to see himself as the head of the Holy Office.

You remember how that turned out.