“Climate Fears and Finance” - A look at CRC's Dr. S.J. Allen’s fraud.

I will be taking a closer look at Dr. Steven Allen’s (Capital Research Center) YouTube feature, “Climate Fears and Finance” which is a stringing together of misrepresentations, innuendo and lies about a topic that is of critical importance to our future, after an introduction. 

Finishing my Investors Business Daily takedown was the usual let down.  No one seems concerned or interested.  No one wants to be bothered.  In my short email exchanges with Dr. Mann, I could almost hear him thinking: ‘Buddy, I got a bottom drawer full of this and worse! What do you want me to do about it?’  Thing is, that’s right.  He’s got far more important work to do with that incredible brain, his time is too precious to be squandered on such contrived delusionals.

Still, people should care.  In particular, I can’t grasp why there are so few knowledgable students who care about their futures and honesty enough to confront such trash in comments sections where ever that sort of fraud gets astro-turfed.  

Why aren’t hundreds writing the sort of take-downs I am - say what you will about my quality or tone, these dissections are to the point and packed with valid information that climate science contrarians always run and hide from.  Nor are they tough to put together, if you have a familiarity with the topic, a curiosity to search out more information and wrestle with arguments.  They also make excellent personal learning tools. 

Or, for that matter the older folks like me who have been attentive witnesses to the past decades of slow ominous degradation of the biosphere we were born into, mature people who resent juvenile malicious nonsense when they see it.  We have Potholer54 and Greenman3610, but need many more.  Why are we leaving the playing field open to these strategically manipulative fraudsters?

In any event I did what I could, it’s part of the record now, back to catching up on my wage slaving obligations.  In my spare time I've returned to wresting with the Map Territory Problem and am reading from suggestions that Trenberth and Francis offered and this.  Of course, such reading always leads to looking up more papers.  Check out one link, read the abstract, perhaps dig into the full paper if available, do a little searching for other stuff related to points raised, see something else that catches my eye, before I know, I’ve got multiple pages with a dozen tabs on each open and me overwhelmed with info overload and deeply humbled by the folds within folds of complexities.  That’s when I must step back allowing things to soak in, reestablish my grip on the fundamentals and to get some perspective.

If I visit CFI and am not careful my sparring mate Mikie The Contrarian will have me chasing another one of his shticks.  Which is how I discovered the scandalous Dr. S.J. Allen of the Capital Research Center where he’s Vice President & Chief Investigative Officer.  He previously served as press secretary to U.S. Senator Jeremiah Denton, as editor of Tea Party Review magazine, and as senior researcher for Newt Gingrich 2012.  

edited 9/30/2017,  9:00 PM
Links to info re feedback mechanisms added October 11.

#E) Examining Investors Business Daily’s malicious libel against Dr. Mann (28-36 and fini)

“No, Michael Mann, Global Warming Didn't Cause Hurricane Harvey's Devastation”  (8/31/2017 - Investor's Business Daily at investors.com)Written by someone unwilling to put their name on this libelous cowardly act of defamation.

I have no idea who's behind Investor's Business Daily or this editorial, but I know fraud and libel when I see it.  I have spent the past few days dissecting this particular example of calumny crossing over into what seems to me felonious  criminal vandalism on Professor Mann’s professional reputation - not to mention we the citizen's right and need to honestly hear about what climate scientists are learning!

To spell out my case I have quoted the entire editorial in five chapters (nothing left out, nothing added) talking point by talking point, in chronological order, broken down into bite-sized chunks.  Here we examine the final Points of Contention 28 to 36, what can I say, there was more fodder here than the 24 points of contention I initially spotted.  Investors Business Daily quotes are in Courier font

Investor's Business Daily POC#28 - “In short, it's part of a long-term weather pattern — not climate change. 

_______________________________ 

Well yes, it’s part of a long-term climate pattern which gets reflected in the increasingly extreme weather unfolding before our eyes.  

Think of weather as the agent that transfers the broiling heat and atmospheric moisture of the tropics into the colder polar regions.  Increasing heat will increase the amount of energy and moisture weather patterns need to transport.  Quite simple.  Quite inevitable.

Incidentally, for the record, “climate change” is a result and tells us nothing.  Think physics, it’s “Global Warming” that is driving all these transitions.  Increasing heat, energy and atmospheric moisture is what’s changing our climate, along with the weather patterns that spawn out of this energized weather engine.  

Compounding interest working in the natural world.  Simple physics.

Investor’s Business wants us to ignore  

#D) Examining Investors Business Daily’s malicious libel against Dr. Mann (15-27)

“No, Michael Mann, Global Warming Didn't Cause Hurricane Harvey's Devastation”  (8/31/2017 - Investor's Business Daily at investors.com) Written by someone unwilling to put their name on this libelous cowardly act of defamation.

I have no idea who's behind Investor's Business Daily or this editorial though it has the stink of GOP astro-turfing about it.  But I know fraud and libel when I see it and I will be spending the next few days dissecting this particular example of calumny crossing over into what seems to me felonious criminal vandalism on Professor Mann’s professional reputation - not to mention the citizen's right and need to honestly hear about what climate scientists are learning!

To spell out my case I will be quoting the entire editorial (nothing left out, nothing added) talking point by talking point, in chronological order.  Though broken down into bite-sized chunks, here we examine Points of Contention 15 to 27, Investors Business Daily quotes are in Courier font.

UQx Denial101x Making Sense of Climate Science Denial

Message to interested readers, I'm just an outside life long observer and my writing is done in fits and starts with constant short and long interrupts, thus it never surpasses the 'grandma moses' level.  But, my information is solid and my reasoning is solid and I welcome anyone with more time and focus, to take anything at WUWTW and use it as a starting point for better efforts that reach more people.  

Of course, if anyone were interested in helping me work on this, my obvious passion, to see what I could accomplish with the luxury of full-time focus on my side, please do let me know.  Thank you, Peter aka citizenschallenge

P.O.Box 56 - Durango, Colorado, 81302 - citizenschallenge at gmail

_______________________________________________________________

Investor's Business Daily POC#16 - “It could happen because the giant global-warming industry — made up of government bureaucrats, professors, scientists, researchers and think-tank fellows, and allied as it is to the U.N.'s socialist agenda”

_______________________________ 

Here they go again, rather than sticking to the topic of Hurricane Harvey’s supposed non-connection to our warming global weather engine, Investor’s Business want’s us to forget the topic and climb into the world of polarized political showmanship and enemy fabrication.

The more outlandish the better for inflaming the troops.  UN is a socialist plot to take away all your freedoms.  Come on you sillies get real, we depend on our weather for all we hold near and dear, can we get on point?  Any appreciation for our society includes an awareness that weather impacts every facet of our lives.  

We want people to study it, we want people understanding how we are changing it and what those changes mean for our future, and how to prepare.

Oh speaking of sinister mega plots, 

Oil Giants Spend $115 Million A Year To Oppose Climate Policy

By Casey Williams

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oil-companies-climate-policy_us_570bb841e4b0142232496d97

Major fossil fuel companies and trade groups shell out nearly $115 million a year to oppose efforts to reduce carbon emissions, according to a new report from the British research organization Influence Map.

#C) Examining Investors Business Daily’s malicious libel against Dr. Mann (10-14)

“No, Michael Mann, Global Warming Didn't Cause Hurricane Harvey's Devastation”  (8/31/2017 - Investor's Business Daily at investors.com) Written by someone unwilling to put their name on this libelous cowardly act of defamation.

I have no idea who's behind Investor's Business Daily or this editorial, but I know fraud and libel when I see it and I will be spending the next few days dissecting this particular example of calumny crossing over into what seems to me felonious  criminal vandalism on Professor Mann’s professional reputation - not to mention the citizen's right and need to honestly hear about what climate scientists are learning!

To spell out my case I will be quoting the entire editorial (nothing left out, nothing added) talking point by talking point, in chronological order.  Though broken down into bite-sized chunks, here we examine Points of Contention 10 to 14, Investors Business Daily quotes are in Courier font. 

Message to interested readers, I'm just an outside life long observer and my writing is done in fits and starts with constant short and long interrupts, thus it never surpasses the 'grandma moses' level.  But, my information is solid and my reasoning is solid and I welcome anyone with more time and focus, to take anything at WUWTW and use it as a starting point for better efforts that reach more people.  

Of course, if anyone were interested in helping me work on this, my obvious passion, to see what I could accomplish with the luxury of full-time focus on my side, please do let me know.  Thank you, Peter aka citizenschallenge

P.O.Box 56 - Durango, Colorado, 81302 - citizenschallenge at gmail

______________________________________________________________

Investor's Business Daily POC#10 - “Ironically, Mann published his hockey-stick paper in 1998,” 

_______________________________

Yet more ironically, his detractors never mention this part of that paper:

Global-scale temperature patterns and climate forcing over the past six centuries

Michael E. Mann, Raymond S. Bradley & Malcolm K. Hughes

http://www.atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca/people/guido/PHY2502/articles/climate-records/Mann_Bradley_Hughes_1998.pdf

http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/articles/MBH98-corrigendum04.pdf

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Northern Hemisphere Temperature During the Past Millennium: 

Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations

Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley, Malcom Hughes

March 15, 1999

http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/public_html/shared/articles/MBH1999.pdf

______________________________________________________________

Investor's Business Daily POC#11 - “after which satellite temperature data — the most complete and accurate weather data we have"

_______________________________
This opens up quite the can of worms, but if Investor’s Daily wants to go there so be it.  

#B) Examining Investors Business Daily’s malicious libel against Dr. Mann (4-9)

“No, Michael Mann, Global Warming Didn't Cause Hurricane Harvey's Devastation”  (8/31/2017 - Investor's Business Daily at investors.com) Written by someone unwilling to put their name on this libelous cowardly act of defamation.

I have no idea who's behind Investor's Business Daily, but I know fraud and libel when I see it and I will be spending the next few days dissecting this particular example of malicious wordsmithing crossing over into criminal vandalism in an effort to make my case.  

I will be quoting the entire (nothing left out, nothing added) editorial, talking point by talking point, in chronological order, though broken down into bite-sized chunks, here we examine Points of Contention (POC) 4 to 9, Investors Business Daily quotes are in Courier font. 

Message to interested readers, I'm just an outside life long observer and my writing is done in fits and starts with constant short and long interrupts, thus it never surpasses the 'grandma moses' level.  But, my information is solid and my reasoning is solid and I welcome anyone with more time and focus, to take anything at WUWTW and use it as a starting point for better efforts that reach more people.  

Of course, if anyone were interested in helping me work on this, my obvious passion, to see what I could accomplish with the luxury of full-time focus on my side, please do let me know.  Thank you, Peter aka citizenschallenge

P.O.Box 56 - Durango, Colorado, 81302 - citizenschallenge at gmail

_______________________________ 

Investor's Business Daily POC#4 - “In this case, it was temperature data. Mann's famous "hockey stick" rendition of temperature and climate changes makes it appear as if temperatures began rising sharply in the 19th century as carbon dioxide from the Industrial Revolution began to build up,”

___________________________

First, this mixing up temperature and climate change as though it’s the same thing indicates profound unfamiliarity with the most fundamental 'facts of life' of our global climate engine.  “Climate changes” are the result of warming (or cooling) our planet!  

When it comes from the lips of experts, it’s an indication of the hideous amount of seepage they’ve allowed to fuzzy up their communication.  It’s simple unavoidable physics warming leads, changes follow, propaganda-speak not withstanding.

The rest is true enough.  That is what Mann et al. 1998 and 1999 did, because that’s where the data took them.  But please remember, the graph is about tracking temperature - NOT climate change.

Those were pioneering papers.  They were built on the work of others and others have continued to build on their effort.

“An independent assessment of Mann's hockey stick was conducted by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (Wahl 2007). … , they confirmed the principal results of the original hockey stick - that the warming trend and temperatures over the last few decades are unprecedented over at least the last 600 years.”

“Changes in surface temperature send thermal waves underground, cooling or warming the subterranean rock.  … 350 bore holes in North America, Europe, Southern Africa and Australia (Huang 2000). …, yielding only century-scale trends. What they find is that the 20th century is the warmest of the past five centuries with the strongest warming trend in 500 years.”

“… A reconstruction of Northern Hemisphere temperature from stalagmites shows…, the temperature in the latter 20th Century exceeds the maximum estimate over the past 500 years (Smith 2006)."

Historical records of glacier length …, temperatures in recent decades exceed the uncertainty range over the past 400 years (Oerlemans 2005)

Figure 6: Composite Northern Hemisphere land and land plus ocean temperature reconstructions and estimated 95% confidence intervals. Shown for comparison are published Northern Hemisphere reconstructions (Mann 2008).
https://www.skepticalscience.com

In other words, all the real world physical evidence indicates the Dr. Mann’s team was onto something.  So why does the GOP and Investors Business trivialize it?  This is important information to process.  

#A) Examining Investors Business Daily’s malicious libel against Dr. Mann (1,2,3)

Investors Business Daily: “No, Michael Mann, Global Warming Didn't Cause Hurricane Harvey's Devastation”  (8/31/2017) Written by someone unwilling to put their name on this libelous cowardly act of defamation.

Sometimes it seems that scientists still haven’t figured out that the world is not filled with curious interested students wanting to understand our Earth’s climate engine’s geophysics better.  Tragically most people couldn’t care less and it seems an increasingly large portion are getting hostile and actually do not want to know.  Add to the horror, there are a few who are willing to do very ruthless things to make sure others don’t get a chance to learn about climate science.

An excellent example of this mentality is www Investors.com recent character assassination hit on Dr. Michael Mann, via an outrageous, I’m claiming criminally libelous editorial at their Investors Business Daily.  Fortunately Dr. Mann has escaped this latest attempt on his character and continues to do world class science.   

I have no idea who's behind Investors Business Daily, but I know fraud when I see it and I will be spending the next few days dissecting this particular example of malicious wordsmithing in an effort to make my case.  

A preliminary review gives me 24 specific Points of Contention, final turned out to be 36 points of contention.  I will be quoting the entire (nothing deleted, nothing added) editorial, talking point by talking point, in chronological order, though broken down into bite-sized chunks.  Often I'll be speaking first person to the writers, so don't take the "you" personally, well unless you agree their GOP view of the world.  

My first three Points Of Contention.

Investor's Business Daily POC#1 - “Global Warming: When a controversial climatologist (Michael Mann)…”

Controversial?  Hmmm, who is calling Dr. Mann controversial?

Sure Dr. Mann has been targeted by ruthless coordinated attacks from EXXON and Koch industry forces along with the powers of the Murdoch media octopus, and GOP luminaries - parties who’s main interest is to slanderize, ridicule and dismiss serious climate science using whatever tactic is required at the moment.

The thing to remember is that Dr. Mann has continued doing serious science and as such the people most qualified to judge him are his peers, namely the community of scientists and experts who understand the extremely complex subject he’s put his mind to.

Google can offer us some idea of their collective opinion of Dr. Mann’s competence and integrity.  Take a look, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_E._Mann,

Message to interested readers, I'm just an outside life long observer and my writing is done in fits and starts with constant short and long interrupts, thus it never surpasses the 'grandma moses' level.  But, my information is solid and my reasoning is solid and I welcome anyone with more time and focus, to take anything at WUWTW and use it as a starting point for better efforts that reach more people.  

Of course, if anyone were interested in helping me focus more on this, my obvious passion, to see what I could accomplish with the luxury of full-time focus on my side, please do let know.  

Citizenschallenge - P.O.Box 56 - Durango, Colorado, 81302 - citizenschallenge at gmail

Reality check, deniable but unavoidable Geophysics of a warming planet

Pumphandle 2016

CarbonTracker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gH6fQh9eAQE

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

August 31 an outfit called Investors.com under cover of the "Daily Business" wrote an editorial that no one had the guts to put their name behind.  Figures since it's such a perfect example of libelous criminal mischief and intellectual vandalism.  My initial read indicated some 24 talking points to build my case on.
  
I believe all too often timid professionally/politically constrained experts give aid and comfort to such deliberate misinformers by their obsessive public focus on fringe uncertainties -> rather than reminding everyone of the geophysical certainties we are dealing with here.  This latest example of malicious character assassination against Dr. Mann is an example of what such unrecognized seepage has accomplished these past decades.  

Before I begin my slog through that thing, I believe it's important to take a moment to look at the essence of what our planet's Global Heat and Moisture Distribution Engine is all about.  Starting point an unfortunate quote from that editorial:

CNN Newsroom host John Berman asked former National Hurricane Center Director Bill Read point-blank whether climate change had affected the intensity of Hurricane Harvey. 

Read said he "probably wouldn't attribute (global warming to) what we're looking at here. This is not an uncommon occurrence to see storms grow and intensify rapidly in the western Gulf of Mexico. That is, as long as we've been tracking them, that has occurred.” 

{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Read - Navy meteorologist background.}

For the other side of that: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/28/climate-change-hurricane-harvey-more-deadly

Quite frankly it doesn’t matter what I, or some politically terrified official pronounces.  The outside reality is that our planet has begun a radical transition towards a much much warmer climate regime.  Simply because measuring and putting exact attribution numbers on it is exceedingly difficult, doesn't justify ignoring the geophysics unfolding under our noses! 

* Global warming is definitely directly related to that hot Gulf of Mexico waters that fed an explosive intensification of a tropical storm.

* Global warming is definitely directly related to the fact that the atmosphere is holding more moisture and making it available for storm systems such as Harvey to collect and dump, while adding energy to the system.

* Global warming is definitely directly related to the fact that our Jet Stream has gotten weirder and is currently causing the stalling and reversal of Harvey’s northward movement.

* Global warming is definitely directly related to the fact that sea level is rising and thus adding substantially to damaging storm surges.

* Global warming is definitely directly related to the "Brown Ocean Effect" that continued feeding moisture and energy into Harvey and certain other hurricanes after making land fall.

If I’m mistaken it should be simple enough to explain my error in a constructive manner.

If you can’t do that, perhaps you should consider allowing those points to take prominence over nitpicking fringe uncertainties and the struggle for statistical perfection.

Diary 9/12/17 - (9/13 revised) how dare I use modern marvels and demand honestly looking at science

So how many of you climate change scientist (or communicators) are not buying any items made from or by fossil fuels to save the planet? How many? 

Last night while looking at Michael Tobis’ blog  he mentioned a malicious editorial character assassination attempt on Michael Mann by “Investers Daily" editorial written August 31, conveniently linking to it, but I won't.  No author listed but then I can understand no one wanting to take credit for it.  Michael Tobis did make a point of affirming Michael Mann's integrity:

“I've disagreed with Mike in the past on science communication, and probably will again, but I have no doubt about his rigor, honesty, and competence as a scientist. 

His productivity under the bizarre adverse conditions that have surrounded his career is a remarkable and impressive achievement, and my hat is off to him as far as that goes.”      M. Tobis

The Investers Daily editorial seems to me an example of malicious criminal libel, one that at the very least demands a line by line take down.  A simple listing of their lies, trash talk, libel, and other tactics employed by the GOP climate science bashing machine with such tragic success.

Unfortunately, I'm on another assignment, spent 9 hours hanging sheetrock with more tomorrow.  So I spent the day frustratedly biding my time, sneaking peaks line by line and making mental notes.  

Then I come home and rather than having some time to start in on the Investers Daily editorial, I got caught up in responding to E. Varnado.  Since he wasted this chunk of my precious time I’m going to share my comments.  It’ll add some personal background to the bigger debate I’m striving to push.

E Varnado commented at Howard Hayden’s one-letter disproof of global warming claims - examined  ... 

So how many of you climate change scientist are not buying any items made from or by fossil fuels to save the planet? How many? 

Are you not driving or flying and etc. to save the planet. 

September 12, 2017 at 5:54 PM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

E Varnado,

Can you explain what that has to do with honesty looking at and learning about what's happening to our planet from serious climate science ? ? ?

What does it have to do with deliberately lying about what scientists have actually said and done?  Instead all your type can offer is full on dirty fighting attacks, that go for the throat that disregard honesty and looking at the actual facts - and never, ever any interest in learning anything.

What's the matter with you?  Why do you have to fantasize we're your enemy or some stupid stuff like that?

Phil Klotzbach's response to Citizenschallenge Examined - The Map vs. Territory Problem

Phil Klotzbach gave me his permission to share this email and I thank him.  I haven’t changed any of his words, I simply follow along and share my responses as I try fleshing out this Map vs. Territory Problem I'm trying to explain.  By that I mean the attitude that unless you can statistically prove it, it doesn't exist and should be dismissed, even though the physics dictates it must exist and had better be taken seriously.

There’s also the seepage issue, a sort of self-censorship where certain information is being withheld while other information is given inordinate weight - following the contrarian script rather than focusing on conveying the physical reality.

Dr. Klotzbach's words are in Georgia font, while mine are in Verdana.  

_____________________________________________________________

From: Phil Klotzbach
Date: Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 6:51 AM
Subject: Re: fyi, just posted "Surely you’re joking Dr. Klotzbach, no hurricane global warming connection"
To:  citizenschallenge @ gmail 

           Dr. Klotzbach:  Apologies for a delay, but it's been a very hectic past few days.  

No apology needed, considering your lead author of the Colorado State University Department of Atmospheric Science’s seasonal hurricane forecast, I imagine you’re probably running on four hours of sleep these past few weeks.  I was surprised to receive any response, let alone such a thoughtful one.  I don’t mind admitting I’m honored and thank you for your time and effort.

Explaining your position will allow me to explain mine, which I believe is compatible with the need for vigorous science in all it’s maddening details minutia and uncertainties.

______________________________________________________________________________

Dr. Klotzbach:  In answer to your questions, I have spent over 15 years working with historical hurricane data, primarily for the Atlantic but over the last several years with global data, so I do not make statements like I did on NPR and many other news outlets without having spent much time understanding the nuances of the technology going into the analyses.  

I acknowledge your expertise, in fact both Drs. Mann and Tobis made a point of telling me your professional reputation among experts is solid.  Me?  I’m a layperson and my hobby for the past 45 years has been learning about Earth sciences.  Evolution and our planet’s global heat and moisture distribution engine have been of particular fascination to me.  

My position is that while our actual living breathing climate engine is infinitely complex, it follows fundamental and well understood laws - which I believe are too often left behind in favor of obsessing over trying to explain uncertainties that in the end are more irrelevant than not, and only serve to sooth people into complacent disconnect from the changes happening underfoot.  This is what my Map vs. Territory Problem is all about, allow me to explain.