A Profession Without Intelligence

Michael Mann, who has a PhD in geology, says 1,200 PPM would create a world without clouds.

For the majority of time life has existed on Earth, atmospheric CO2 has been well above 1,200 PPM. There would be no oceans on Earth if there were no clouds.  How could any geologist be as clueless as Michael Mann?

CO2: Past, Present, & Future – Time Scavengers

Michael Mann also believes Putin controls climate skepticism.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to A Profession Without Intelligence

  1. Chris C says:

    But the *models* say there would be no clouds at >1200 ppm. And as we all know, when the models and reality disagree, reality must be wrong.

    • Eric Simpson says:

      “Rather than seeing models as describing literal truth, we ought to see them as convenient fictions which try to provide something useful [ie propaganda!].” -David Frame, Oxford U climate modeler

      “The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.” -Chris Folland, Head of the Hadley Centre’s Climate Variability and Forecasting Group

    • Louis Hooffstetter says:

      “The failure of nature to conform to the General Circulation Models is seen not as refuting the models, but due to errors in reality and mistakes on the part of the researchers.”
      Generic IPCC Climate Scientist

  2. Dave N says:

    “Think about that for a minute”

    Obviously the thought process was not even for a couple of seconds, because it was > 1200ppm for all of the Triassic and Jurassic. No clouds = no rain = essentially no fresh water = no plant life = no herbivores = no carnivores = no freakin’ life. Perhaps the dinosaurs never existed?

    What a complete and utter idiot

  3. spike55 says:

    Umm, and there I thought that CO2 was meant to warm up the atmosphere and cause MORE evaporation, hence more rain.

    Seems the story changes every day !

    Sorry Mickey Mann, but you are a CRASS ZERO-SCIENCE IDIOT !!!

  4. Louis Hooffstetter says:

    Every scientific article I’ve ever read by Michael Mann was complete BS.
    Every comment of Michael Mann that I’ve ever read was complete BS.
    He can’t seem to help himself. He seems incapable of telling the truth.
    He’s a pathological liar.

    • Disillusioned says:

      Exactly. He’s a rent-seeking opportunist. Not a dumbass. He is smart enough to know he has been found out. He knows he must keep up this charade as long as he can. He has no other option.

  5. scott allen says:

    the Intelligence agencies report ( on 6 January 2017) that was the part of the basis for the Mueller investigation has a widely overlook appendix. Which said that the Russians have supported the anti fracking movement and other environmental organizations which benefited the gas/oil industry in Russia, but of course this was ignored and the media focused on Trump.
    See appendix A page 8.


  6. Steven Fraser says:

    Michael Mann did not write the article, he was quoted by it.

    The article, by Jessica Corbett at Commondreams.com, is covering a new study published in Nature Geoscience Monday this week. The paper is from some folks at Caltech, who ran a computer simulation (a model), using (what they called) ‘Business as usual’ CO2 accumulation to 1200 ppm, which on its own, ‘may’ raise avg temp by 4C ‘ from current temps. At that point, they claim the stratocumulus clouds stop forming, and 8C of additional warming occurs due to increased worldwide insolation.

    The usual suspects’ tweets are quoted: Bill McKibben, Naomi Klein, Natalie Wolchover, Michael Mann, Thomas Levinson, and Chris Mooney.

    Following the link to the original paper


    we find the following:
    The authors are all at the JPL at Caltech:

    Corresponding Author is (Professor) Tapio Schneider

    Colleen M. Kaul, Postdoc scholar

    Kyle G. Pressel

    The paper itself is at the following URL. Its worth a read for some interesting bits


    Here is a direct quote that all might find interesting:

    ‘Key processes in stratocumulus-topped boundary layers, such as entrainment across the inversion, occur at scales of tens of metres and smaller. This is much too small to be resolvable in global climate models (GCMs), which currently have horizontal resolutions of tens of kilometres. GCMs therefore resort to parameterizations,
    which relate stratocumulus occurrence to resolved large-scale variables, such as temperature or humidity. However, the parameterizations are notoriously inaccurate: GCMs severely underestimate the prevalence of stratocumulus decks and confidence in the simulations of their climate change response is low.’

    ‘The baseline simulation with 400 ppm CO2 produces stratocumulus decks like those observed (Fig. 2). When CO2 levels are increased, SST first increases as in current GCMs, for example, in the tropics by 3.6 K for the CO2 doubling from 400 to 800 ppm (Fig. 3d). (CO2 levels here should be understood as the equivalent CO2 levels
    that correspond to a change in the concentration of all well-mixed greenhouse gases.) Cloud cover remains dense (Fig. 3a), but the amount of liquid water in the clouds decreases slightly (Fig. 3b), as seen in previous LES studies with prescribed SSTs. However, when a CO2 threshold is crossed at around 1,200 ppm, the stratocumulus decks abruptly become unstable and break up into scattered cumulus clouds’

    The paper is not long, just a few pages. It does not directly list the RCP on which the ‘one century’ estimate is based, but this paper is referenced in context:
    Meinshausen, M. et al. The RCP greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions from 1765 to 2300. Clim. Change 109, 213–241 (2011). The URL is

    There, the ECS of 3.0, and RCP8.5 are shown to be listed as the ones being referenced by the original paper, and references are made to datasets which ‘extend’ RCP scenarios out to 2500. See section ‘3 Post-2100 extension’ for discussion, which includes this little tidbit:

    ‘The adopted RCP8.5 extension (ECP8.5) leads to a CO2 stabilization after 2250 at roughly 2000 ppm, or more than 7-times pre-industrial CO2 concentrations.’

    Of some interest as well is the table of ‘GHG Forcing Agents’, which does not contain an entry for H20 vapor. Also, this chart shows that NONE of the RCPs or their extensions other than RPC8.5 will result in the CO2 ppm level of 1200ppm listed in the original paper, and that level is only reached (interpolating in the table) around 2125.

    The paper is worth your time to understand the state of the art of this kind of work.

  7. Hivemind says:

    Actually you’ll find that there are a lot of very intelligent people behind the climate change fraud. But completely and utterly without ethics.

    • Cynthia says:

      Perhaps Mann is
      1) a true believer.
      2) a fraud without ethics.
      I can’t read his mind, so it’s hard to tell.

      • arn says:


        is a truly believing that fraud without ethics are the only way
        to keep AGW alive.
        (as i’m pretty sure that 3 decades of failed prediction will erase all believes)

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      True, under the standard definitions of ethics, just like leftist academia and politics inspired by the Marxist doctrine. This is by design.

      The Marxists said from the beginning they rejected old “bourgeois” morality and developed new ethics. They engage in convoluted ways of justifying their doctrine but it boils down to good old “the ends justify the means”.

  8. Hivemind says:

    There are actually a lot of very intelligent people behind the climate change industry. Just completely and utterly without ethics.

    Does this version get through the filters?

  9. MGJ says:

    I fear the game’s up for clouds. They’re a goner. If CO2 doesn’t get them then Brexit will.
    The same tired old BS pouring into the same brainwashed skulls.

    This is an effect of the complete separation of education and thinking.

  10. Lasse says:

    Solar brightening is real!
    What if SO2 has an impact of cloud formation ;-)

  11. Gator says:

    OK, I can’t resist. With my sincerest apologies to Joni Mitchell…

    Both Sides Now

    Woes and blows to warmist scares
    Excise schemes now in cross hairs
    And weather claxons now despair
    I’ve looked at clouds that way

    We all know that they block the sun
    And rain and snow on everyone
    So many things frauds would have done
    But clouds got in their way

    We’ve looked at clouds from both sides now
    From cool and warm, and still somehow
    Warmist delusions I recall
    They really don’t know clouds at all

    Loons and goons with feckless deals
    Are busy advancing their ideal
    And so their fairytale reveal
    We’ve heard them yack away

    But now it’s not supposed to snow
    So we’re laughing as they eat crow
    And polar bears, their numbers grow
    Hint: check the Hudson bay

    We’ve looked for signs of high tides now
    From near and far, no rise somehow
    Warmist delusions we recall
    They really don’t know squat at all

    Tears and fears and feeling proud
    To say “It’s bullshit!” right out loud
    Dreams and schemes of circus clowns
    The crooks’ in disarray

    This now transends just acting strange
    We shake our heads, they’re so deranged
    They’re data’s lost, still unexplained
    United Nations way

    We’ve heard their crap, their sacred cow
    From kin and news and still somehow
    It’s Mann’s delusions I recall
    He really don’t crap at all

    I’ve looked at clouds from both sides now
    From cool and warm, and still somehow
    Those warmists really are dirt balls
    They really don’t know clouds at all

    • David A says:

      Gator, perfect. Where did the lyrics cone from. Those were perfect in rhyme and meaning!
      I really hope a talented singer does a video of this!

    • Jason Calley says:

      Gator, did you write that? Well done!

      Just as a side note, is there enough fossil fuel to actually get the CO2 to above1200ppm? Yes, I know that a lot of that fuel formed when CO2 was even higher, but a lot of that CO2 also went into creating limestone and other carbonates. Is there enough CO2 in fossil fuel to bump us back up? The plants would sure love it, and as for the “no clouds” thing, that is just foolish.

      • Morgan says:

        Thanks. First person that recognized plants loving it. Plants can take up to 1600ppm of CO2. Without changing anything, you get harvests up to 30% more.

  12. GW Smith says:

    Tony, you better get on your hot-line to Putin and tell him Mann is on to you.

  13. dave1billion says:

    Hey Tony, how about breaking us “bots” off a piece of that Putin check?

    You can pay me in rubles. I can convert those to real money at the airport.

    Between this new cash flow and those Big Oil checks you can afford to share the wealth a little.

    Can we maybe get a nickel a post? (that comes to a little over 3 rubles).

  14. David A says:

    Gator, perfect. Where did the lyrics cone from. Those were perfect in rhyme and meaning!
    I really hope a talented singer does a video of this!

  15. T. Erickson says:

    Wish I could downvote him on Twitter for his antics, but alas he blocked me a couple of years ago. I wonder if Scott Adams has been blocked my him for even questioning the Mann behind the curtan.

  16. GCSquared says:

    “How could any geologist be as clueless as Michael Mann?” Years of practice, unstinting encouragement, and public gullibility:

    “It’s not a coincidence that denialist talking points are coordinated. They are. The same bad actors who hacked our election continue to try to hack our public discourse on climate change through manipulation of social media using carefully deployed armies of bots & trolls…”

    Aha! So PUTIN is behind all this! That explains everything. Tony Heller must be a Kremlin agent. (Can I claim originality on this accusation, or has this slander been tried before?)

  17. Chris says:

    I believe Venus has ~950,000 PPM CO2 and, gee, there are no clouds there!!

    • tonyheller says:

      Venus is completely obscured by clouds

      • Rah says:

        Yep! Just a bright ball in the telescope. Talk about albedo! Venus has got it in spades and that us why when it’s up at night only the moon beats it.

        Still on the road.

    • Jason Calley says:

      Hey chris! “gee, there are no clouds there!!”

      Ha! I bet Mann would respond that “Well, there are clouds there — but none of them are water! Right again, as always!” At which point he would probably get out his (pretend) Nobel Prize and polish it up a little.

  18. DHR says:

    so long as space is very cold and there is water evaporating on the earth’s surface, there will be clouds. Only a climate model could conclude otherwise.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.