"A Disgrace to the Profession": 1

I have read all of Mark Steyn's books, and in my opinion he's the best writer in the world today. This is a devastating takedown of Dr Michael Mann's infamous 'Hockey Stick Graph' which is probably the biggest single component in the case made by the IPCC and Al Gore amongst others that catastrophic AGW is real and happening. If you have any interest in the Global Warming debate then this book is an absolute must read. Mark has collected the thoughts of the world's most eminent climate experts and scientists (most of whom do believe in AGW, so don't be afraid to pick this book up if you think it's going to be biased) on the hard science behind this graph, so it's not a case of Mark framing the debate one way or another, but presenting clearly the whole picture. I work in a scientific field, and often use statistical models to process raw data, which use filters and gating to try and remove noise and weighting to privilege certain data sets based on their perceived reliability, before the model gets to process the data and then, only if the model is good, (or close to reality if you like) will it be able to solve, and the errors being flagged will not exceed what is deemed acceptable - for there are always errors. A model is a statistical tool to reduce noise in data. The key elements here is the quality of the model and the quality AND quantity of the data - of course the better all of these are then the smaller the errors will be (statistically) and you can get a clearer picture of what you are looking at, that corresponds to the reality of the observations.... BUT even then the model will only solve for where you have programmed it to take you (usually because that is what you thought corresponded closest to reality) The model is not real - only a facsimile of a reality that you have already decided upon - the proof of the pudding is in how well you can match reality. If reality does not apply, then you can make any model take you anywhere with any data. I think in Michael Mann's case, and indeed much of the models used by the IPCC they do not correspond to reality and that is their only fault, because any other parameter is of course subjective. (They give too much weighting to CO2 and its effect on the climate and also the amount of data AND its quality is not high in my personal opinion) Well - that's my two pence worth. The mind-blowingly brilliant scientists in this book (some of whom are doing brilliant work that staggers me, science CAN in fact be amazing) that Mark presents, IN THEIR OWN UNEDITED WORDS, are worth taking seriously. Let the science speak at last, because the IPCC and State sponsored organisations who have hijacked the debate for political and personal reasons have held centre stage too long. (Yes, yes, I realise that in the socialist world, actions are not correlated with consequences and anything is possible! Forward!) Thank you Mark Steyn, Prize Fighter for the Truth. Undefeated. I hope you will get your day in court and Dr Mann will stop wasting your time so you can get more books out. I can't wait for the next one.

This book makes an excellent contribution to what passes for the 'climate debate'. The Mann et al. hockey-stick was such a sloppy, loaded, junky piece of work that the authors should have long ago disowned it. Now junk science is usually dealt with in due course by critical reviews, but junk scientists are characterised by their ignoring of them. That too would not matter but for the fact that the IPCC in general, and Houghton in particular, made a really big promotional splash with this hockey-stick, realising quite rightly that it looked scary and would get the kind of headlines they wanted, and the kind of politicians they wanted. Page after page of condemnation will not right their wrongs, but it will get one part of the despicable saga of climate scaremongering very conveniently on the record. Buy this book to keep for your own bookshelf, and buy more copies too to keep handy for anyone you encounter who might not be aware of the descent of Mann.

Mark Steyn's unique and mordant humo(u)r is deployed here just enough to weave together the eviscerating pronouncements of scientists whose relevant credentials are unassailable. He wisely uses this light touch to avoid diminishing the scientists' points, and to group their collective skirmishes against the colossal knob Mann into a brigade level assault. He's at his best when exposing the the fraud of s***ty historical temperature proxies pre 1960s, and when highlighting that Mann's "science" fails the only two tests that all real science must pass; viz, no ex-post predictive ability of any climate model, and no reproducible experiment that consistently disproves alternative hypotheses. Science can be both interesting and useful. Climate hysteria is about faith and politics, both of which can also be both interesting and useful: but they have no more relation to "science" than they have to Baroque counterpoint. The unraveling will be a whimper, not a bang. This book increases the volume of that whimper, and is therefore very welcome and lovely.

Given the damage which can be done by an impending lawsuit - not just legal costs but wasted time, nervous energy, threat to professional reputation etc. - it is clear that this book is as much a reproach to the legal profession in general, and the D of C court system in particular, as it it to its main target, Michael Mann, whose professional and moral standards it so comprehensively and persuasively takes apart. The interminable delays to Mann's libel suit against Steyn have become intolerable, and the author - well known for his hyper-active and outspoken media activity - can wait no longer to see the true picture, as he sees it, in the public domain. The picture which emerges is a neat reversal of the "consensus" argument about global warming, but framed in the context not of the warming itself, but of Mann's famous "hockey stick" representation of it. One after the other, eminent scientists with qualifications and distinctions far superior to those claimed by Mann, set out what is wrong with Mann's work, and why they reject it. None of this evidence is new: it is all extracted from previously published material. The book is well put together and easy to read, despite the technicalities it deals with - and it set the scene for what promised to be a fascinating case when it finally comes to court. Which it probably will, because even if Mann withdraws his suit, Steyn has said he will pursue his counter-suit. Steyn's followers should hold him to it, because this is now an important civil-liberties issue. And if free speech is something you care about, you should certainly read this book.

For me this book was a page turner and a thrill to read. Once Amazon finally shipped my paperback to my part of Canada, I ripped through it in a couple of evenings, and probably would have done it in one sitting had my blissful home life permitted. While the book is in one sense “just” a collection of quotations, it is a collection very carefully organized into themes, with Steyn’s characteristic brand of caustic wit providing a guided tour and running commentary throughout. Steyn has taken a subject which ought by all rights to be dry, boring, and of no interest to anyone with a pulse—to wit, the origin, content, purpose, and total scientific invalidity of Michael E. Mann’s famous “Hockey Stick” graph—and turned it into an entertaining caper through PhD after PhD’s evisceration of Mann. This isn’t a book on CAGW, by the way. It’s a book on Mann, his stick, and its various progeny. It’s important to keep in mind that many scientists who strongly believe in the CAGW theory appear in this book, since the PhD’s quoted span the spectrum from CAGW proponent to lukewarmer to CAGW sceptic. They may believe in CAGW, but they don’t believe in Mann’s stick. The book is organized into 12 chapters, or themes (which I will not spoil for you) beginning with a mini-essay by Steyn and an enjoyable illustration by Josh. Each chapter has about 10 headline quotes from a scientist or group of scientists. Each scientist is introduced with an excerpted “headline” quote and a concise summary of his antecedents, and then the book produces the entire quotation in context and with citation to source, with lively commentary by Steyn and quotes from other scientists weaved in. As an example, in quote #113 a scientist baldly states that the Mann curve is not falsifiable and is not science. The scientist’s antecedents are these: “Director of the Institute of Geophysics in Paris and Professor of Geophysics at the Paris Diderot University. Chevalier of the Légion d’Honneur, and Member of the French Academy of Sciences. Former Director of Research at the French Ministry for National Education, Research and Technology. Former editorial advisor to the journal La Recherche.” Before my copy of the book arrived, there were a few poor reviews (one or two stars) by obvious trolls: Russell S., D. Howitzer, P. “Irrepressible Doomster” Ehrlich. Since I got the book and read it, a few more troll-y reviews have come in (dansat25, Whipple McWhatever). I would pay them no heed. You’ll recognize them first of all because they lack the “Verified Purchase” tag, meaning the writers took time out of their days to come to Amazon to slag the book despite having never bought it. And second because they are sorry grab-bags of vague allegations and attacks against the person, not the argument, e.g.: the quotes in the book are taken out of context (but not a single such quote cited); the book is for un-educated morons (he’s talking about you, dear reader); the people quoted are all old, and old people are senile (again, no evidence cited); the illustrations are by a guy from a part of England I don’t like (uh….); Neil Tyson says physics are real but Mark Steyn thinks they're fake, etc. Even were these troll-reviews more than assortments of vague accusations and ad hominem, they would miss the point of this book. Which, I think it's fair to say, is, unless you are a politician or a gangster, it simply should not be possible to find such a prodigious company, intimately familiar with your work or your character, who have so little good to say about either. The scientists quoted in this book don't tell us that AGW is real or fake, important or trivial. They simply tell us that Mann isn't much of a scientist. He's a political animal, just as Aristotle said he'd be, and a bit of a gangster, too. So I say, buy the book! You’ll definitely learn something, and unless you are just sick to death of the entire CAGW debate and in danger of vomiting if you hear anything more about it (a very valid position, I hasten to add!) then I think you’ll get your money's worth.

Le contexte: Michael Mann, auteur de la courbe en crosse de hockey, a attaqué l'auteur de ce livre, Mark Steyn, (et le National Review, Rand Simberg, et le Competitive Enterprise Institute) pour diffamation pour avoir dit (ou publié/laissé être publié) que la courbe était frauduleuse. À partir de là, les péripéties juridiques sont bien complexes mais Mark Steyn a contrattaqué car il veut que Michael Mann témoigne, sous serment, à propos de son travail. L'enjeu: pour Steyn, c'est la liberté d'expression. Mais face au délai du processus juridique (maintenant 5 ans), il a cherché à creuser dans les raisons qui font que Michael Mann est seul alors que lui a reçu le support de nombreuses personnes et journaux. Le résultat: ce livre qui regroupe de nombreux témoignages de scientifiques à propos de la courbe en crosse de hockey. Quiconque a gratté sous la surface de la question climatique est forcément arrivé aux fameux ClimateGates. Le premier étant connu pour la phrase devenue célèbre de 'hide the decline' (cacher le déclin). Derrière cet emblème, il ne faut néanmoins pas chercher longtemps pour trouver des affirmations prononcées par Mann et ces collègues qui montrent combien, à cette époque du moins, les incertitudes étaient grandes et certaines démarches absolument non scientifiques et non éthiques. Les témoignages regroupés par Steyn sont tellement nombreux que ce livre est le volume 1; un second viendra peut-être avec le temps. Mais d'ores et déjà, le contenu est extraordinaire. Je ne vais pas tout spoiler mais laissez-moi vous donner quelques notions "croustillantes": À la sortie du papier de Mann, la courbe en crosse de hockey était déjà ce qu'elle est aujourd'hui: une anomalie. Plus d'une centaine de papiers en climatologie avaient identifié via de nombreuses méthodes indépendantes l'existence d'une période chaude au Moyen-Âge suivie d'un petit âge glaciaire. Tout ça disparaît dans la courbe de Mann. Pour les températures aux époques sans thermomètres, Mann s'est appuyé sur un proxy dont les spécialistes sont unanimes pour dire qu'il est une bonne représentation des niveaux de CO2 mais pas de la température. Mann l'a tout de même utilisé pour dériver des températures. Les données de ce proxy sont limités au continent nord américain. De proche en proche, la courbe est dite représentative de la température de l'hémisphère nord puis de la planète toute entière. Un professeur en Allemagne, à Berlin, a voulu en savoir plus. Il a assigné à une de ses thésardes de répliquer le travail de Mann. Elle est revenue quasi les mains vides. Quasi car elle a tout de même acquis la certitude qu'il n'était pas possible de répliquer le travail de Mann. Pour cause, ce dernier a mis 7 ans avant de partager le détail de ses données et méthodes. Et vous avez ce genre de choses tout le long du livre. Tout le long. Cela va faire 2 ans que je suis la question climatique et son évolution et j'ai plongé de multiples fois dans les évènements passés. Mais l'ampleur de la fraude caractérisée de la courbe en crosse de hockey m'avait complètement échappé. Je crois qu'elle échappe à tous ceux et celles qui ne sont pas des spécialistes. D'où la question fondamentale de Steyn: comment est-il possible que cette courbe soit devenue un emblème dans les rapports du GIEC, le film d'Al Gore et les médias en général quand les spécialistes avaient connaissance d'autant de problèmes, dans les données, dans les méthodes, dans les conclusions et au final dans la démarche elle-même?

A must read for all climate activists

Mark Steyn's collection of anecdotes & critiques of Michael Mann's "hockey stick" graph is a compelling commentary on the unscientific nature of much of the presentations of the climate alarmists. Should be in your library.

This book builds on the great book by A.W. Montford (which also destroys Michael Mann's ridiculous "hocket stick" hoax). The hockey stick is one cornerstone of the gigantic "climate change scam". It is interesting that the climate change zealots NEVER argue the facts when confronted. Instead they start insults, defamation, censorship, firings etc. Thus further discrediting themselves. Anyway .... read the book.