Mikey Doesn’t Like It!


Screenshot 2016-03-27 at 08.04.31 PM

After attacking me with a bunch of BS, Michael “An Embarrassment To The Profession” Mann has deleted my response. He can’t win a debate, so he censors.


(31) Michael E. Mann – Another must-read from Greg Fishel, who catches…

This was my response, which is now gone.


comment link

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to Mikey Doesn’t Like It!

  1. Mac says:

    I especially like the use of the overworked phrase “cherry picking”. It’s tiresome.

    I notice that in modern times, the definition of “cherry picking” is “any contrary real data which refutes your fabricated data, and would serve to negatively impact your government funding.”

  2. GeologyJim says:

    Mikey doesn’t seem to have published much “research” in the last several years while he’s been suing Mark Steyn and others, writing his non-selling pity-whine book, and swapping tweets with like-minded alarmists.

    And now he’s stuck at the Jerry Sandusky School of Manipulations with nowhere to go

    Poor, poor Mikey. He hates everything!

    • Thisisgettingtiresome says:

      about says it all … Jim :-)

    • dfbaskwill says:

      As a very proud PSU Science graduate, I abhor your invoking of Jerry Sandusky in this post. It shows a lack of thought and a band-wagon mentality. When you offend me, you are offending someone who has done more than you to protect children from people like Jerry and probably thinks like you do in 99% of circumstances. Why conflate these two things and alienate otherwise fellow skeptics?

      I give to the Track and Field team, but refrain from giving to the University otherwise until they fire Mikey and stop their guilt-presuming tribunals against male students accused of sexual assault. Even Jerry deserved due process, and I hope he rots in jail.

  3. Thank you for keeping up the fight against the climate change dogmatists. They have so much personally invested in being right about climate change that instead of seeking to find out the truth using facts, they just keep looking for ways to justify their foregone conclusions. Basically, what they are doing is the opposite of scientific inquiry. Second rate minds, at best.

  4. ItsGettingHotinHereSo says:

    Tony, to his credit, provided a link to the sea level data going back to 1900. When was the last time any organizations like Climate Central provide the entire record? They don’t. They choose a cherry-picked timeframe of the 60’s-70’s in which to start their analysis. They never go back to 1900. It would show the warm 30’s/40’s. Does not fit their narrative.

  5. Any downtrend, at any peroide or lenght after 2000 is interesting. Wasn’t CO2 suppose to make it all worse? A lot worse, – immediately??

    Is it getting worse?

    What’s the story here, did we stop emitting CO2?

  6. Lonny Eachus says:

    If they were really worried about cherry picking, they wouldn’t choose 1979 as the starting point for so many of their trend charts.

    In the beginning, the excuse “That’s approximately when the satellite data began” had at least some shred of validity.

    But now that they’re almost completely ignoring what the satellites say anyway, not so much.

  7. LexingtonGreen says:

    Any publicity for your blog will be good publicity.

  8. Stephen Richards says:

    This is the twat that wouldn’t debate or sit opposite Dr Spencer on TV. Toady wants “good faith discussion”.

    • Robert Austin says:

      I think you are referring to Gavin Schmit, Mann’s doppelganger. Not that Mann would ever willingly appear with Roy Spencer.

  9. Mike Riordan says:

    Keep up the good work. Mann is a joke.

  10. mat says:

    I haven’t posted anything or used FB for 2 or 3 years now, and I simply asked “What happened to all the comments?”. And that too was burned by the Nazi….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.