Mr. Mann exhibits all 4 of Rayner's reactions to uncomfortable knowledge. Why is anyone of average intelligence or better continually bullied by him? Mark Steyn and Simberg compared him to Jerry Sandusky, and we chastised by the jury for as much. A far more accurate comparison for Mr. Mann is to Joseph McCarthy. Where is Joseph Welch, or…
Mr. Mann exhibits all 4 of Rayner's reactions to uncomfortable knowledge. Why is anyone of average intelligence or better continually bullied by him? Mark Steyn and Simberg compared him to Jerry Sandusky, and we chastised by the jury for as much. A far more accurate comparison for Mr. Mann is to Joseph McCarthy. Where is Joseph Welch, or his clone, when he is needed?
Yes, I know, I will go straight to the top of the "sue him" list for my comparison. What the hell, I need something to do!
It is wrong to compare Michael Mann to Joseph McCarthy.
McCarthy was at least 90% correct in naming the Communist agents that had infiltrated the U.S. government. Very few of his accusations were wrong.
Here are three books that provide detail on this:
Haynes and Klehr, "Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America". Yale University Press, 1999. This book shows the many messages sent by telegraph and other methods between USSR agents in Russia and in the United States. They were only released in 1995.
Herman, "Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America's Most Hated Senator" The Free Press, 2000.
M. Stanton Evans, "Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and his fight against America's Enemies" Three Rivers Press, 2007. Evans was one of the most noteworthy journalists of the 20th century. The book is more than 600 pages, with an additional 20 pages for the index.
The USSR had infiltrated the U.S. government in many ways and McCarthy was generally correct about the serious problems that were created by this. It was not just obvious agents like Alger Hiss, but many who were in lower levels of our government.
My apologies for taking so long to respond, as your note prompted some needed research on my part. My purpose in comparing Mann with McCarthy wasn’t in reference to McCarthy’s (or Mann’s, for that matter) accuracy, but rather to McCarthy’s demagogic style. McCarthy addressed a real problem (at that time), but his approach caused untold grief.
I am not qualified to comment on the accuracy of the “hockey stick,” though it seems that when considering the geologic history of the earth, many such hockey sticks can be found. My problem with Mann is his bullying approach, what Judith Curry calls “the scientific madhouse effect.” This is characterized by rampant overconfidence in an overly simplistic theory of climate change, enforcement of a politically-motivated, manufactured ‘consensus’, attempts to stifle scientific and policy debates, activism and advocacy for their preferred politics and policy, self-promotion and ‘cashing in’, and finally public attacks on other scientists that do not support the ‘consensus’.
Perhaps is a smudge on McCarthy to be compared to Mann? Communism eventually collapsed. Hopefully, “Climatism” will suffer the same fate. Thank you again for enlightening me on McCarthy's history. I am old enough to remember (vaguely) the Army-McCarthy hearings, and the public perception of McCarthy' style. But it was never a period that I found interesting, hence my need for research.
I'm not sure, McCarthy didn't have unnamed billionaires paying his legal battles.
Thats another thing i don't get, we aren't supposed to let dark money corrupt and influence elections, isn't the judicial system just as important? If Piltdown is trying to game the system using anonymous money, shouldn't that be exposed?
Aren't we better off if all the cockroaches are exposed to the disinfection of light?
I don't remember the Mccarthy hearings well enough to know about his money. He did have the FBI behind him, and his arrogance certainly is in the same league as Mann's.
What bothers me most is the censorship that comes from an atmosphere of fear. Bullying, ad hominem, litigation, they are all censorship in one form or another.
However you slice it, it is a very sad state of affairs.
Mr. Mann exhibits all 4 of Rayner's reactions to uncomfortable knowledge. Why is anyone of average intelligence or better continually bullied by him? Mark Steyn and Simberg compared him to Jerry Sandusky, and we chastised by the jury for as much. A far more accurate comparison for Mr. Mann is to Joseph McCarthy. Where is Joseph Welch, or his clone, when he is needed?
Yes, I know, I will go straight to the top of the "sue him" list for my comparison. What the hell, I need something to do!
It is wrong to compare Michael Mann to Joseph McCarthy.
McCarthy was at least 90% correct in naming the Communist agents that had infiltrated the U.S. government. Very few of his accusations were wrong.
Here are three books that provide detail on this:
Haynes and Klehr, "Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America". Yale University Press, 1999. This book shows the many messages sent by telegraph and other methods between USSR agents in Russia and in the United States. They were only released in 1995.
Herman, "Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America's Most Hated Senator" The Free Press, 2000.
M. Stanton Evans, "Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and his fight against America's Enemies" Three Rivers Press, 2007. Evans was one of the most noteworthy journalists of the 20th century. The book is more than 600 pages, with an additional 20 pages for the index.
The USSR had infiltrated the U.S. government in many ways and McCarthy was generally correct about the serious problems that were created by this. It was not just obvious agents like Alger Hiss, but many who were in lower levels of our government.
My apologies for taking so long to respond, as your note prompted some needed research on my part. My purpose in comparing Mann with McCarthy wasn’t in reference to McCarthy’s (or Mann’s, for that matter) accuracy, but rather to McCarthy’s demagogic style. McCarthy addressed a real problem (at that time), but his approach caused untold grief.
I am not qualified to comment on the accuracy of the “hockey stick,” though it seems that when considering the geologic history of the earth, many such hockey sticks can be found. My problem with Mann is his bullying approach, what Judith Curry calls “the scientific madhouse effect.” This is characterized by rampant overconfidence in an overly simplistic theory of climate change, enforcement of a politically-motivated, manufactured ‘consensus’, attempts to stifle scientific and policy debates, activism and advocacy for their preferred politics and policy, self-promotion and ‘cashing in’, and finally public attacks on other scientists that do not support the ‘consensus’.
Perhaps is a smudge on McCarthy to be compared to Mann? Communism eventually collapsed. Hopefully, “Climatism” will suffer the same fate. Thank you again for enlightening me on McCarthy's history. I am old enough to remember (vaguely) the Army-McCarthy hearings, and the public perception of McCarthy' style. But it was never a period that I found interesting, hence my need for research.
Thank you for this helpful response!
And I thank you for the reading references.
“ Mark Steyn and Simberg compared him to Jerry Sandusky”
That is Mann’s mischaracterization of it.
In reality they compared his treatment by the university to how it treated Sandusky, with coverups and bullying, and they were 100% right.
Almost certainly that $1mil award will be thrown out but we’ll never hear that in the MSM.
All we’ll hear is Piltdown Mann won.
Same as in the Tim Ball case, Piltdown failed to defend the indefensible and so he “won”.
Purely a SLAPP case same as the recent one
You are totally correct. Even then, don't yiu think the comparison to McCarthy is more appropriate?
I'm not sure, McCarthy didn't have unnamed billionaires paying his legal battles.
Thats another thing i don't get, we aren't supposed to let dark money corrupt and influence elections, isn't the judicial system just as important? If Piltdown is trying to game the system using anonymous money, shouldn't that be exposed?
Aren't we better off if all the cockroaches are exposed to the disinfection of light?
I don't remember the Mccarthy hearings well enough to know about his money. He did have the FBI behind him, and his arrogance certainly is in the same league as Mann's.
What bothers me most is the censorship that comes from an atmosphere of fear. Bullying, ad hominem, litigation, they are all censorship in one form or another.
However you slice it, it is a very sad state of affairs.
If this is not changed it will destroy science for a generation.
Why would anyone believe anything from "science".
Just one more institution destroyed by the communists, for lack of a better word.