Time stamped. 20:20 Dr. Curry opening statement 25:00 Dr. Christy opening statement 30:05 Dr. Mann opening statement 35:32 Dr. Pielke opening statement 44:47 Dr. Mann testifies that pro global warming scientists are being unjustly attacked for their beliefs. Also he implies that scientists who are sceptical of his beliefs are funded by pro oil concerns and the Koch brothers. As Dr. Pielke testified in his opening statement, he was investigated and totally cleared of any ties to big oil or other corporate interests. It is highly ironic that Mann is playing the victim card here since he is/was the plaintiff in two lawsuits against fellow scientists that disagree with his theories. Search Google for Michael Mann Tim Ball lawsuit and Michael Mann Mark Steyn lawsuit for details. Also later in this hearing Dr. Mann is questioned about these lawsuits and refuses to answer. 49:20 Dr. Mann attacks Dr. Roger Pielke on the 538 website controversy. Dr. Pielke's response is here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/12/04/roger-pielke-jr-my-unhappy-life-as-a-climate-heretic/ 56:45 Ms. Bonamici testifies with the commonly mentioned and repeatedly debunked 97% consensus diatribe as proof of the theory of CAGW (catastrophic anthropogenic global warming). 1:14:25 The 97% consensus is debunked and added to the record by Chairman Smith. 1:15:00 Mr. Higgins questions Dr. Mann whether he is involved with the organizations of the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Climate Accountability Institute. Mann stumbles and tries to evade the question. Dr. Mann (as of April 15, 2017) is listed here: http://climateaccountability.org/about.html Mr. Higgins then asks Dr. Pielke a series of short blunt questions about whether severe weather has been increasing or decreasing in recent history. Answer: Hurricanes: Not increasing. Tornados: No data suggests they are increasing. Floods: Not enough data to know. Drought: Not increasing. 2:01:10 Dr. Curry is asked about being called "fringe" due to her sceptical position on CAGW theory. 2:02:35 Mr. Lahood questions the scientists and about Dr. Mann's attacks. Dr. Pielke states: "Everyone deserves to see his behaviour here at this hearing." LOL! 2:04:17 Dr. Curry also makes the statement that the only scientist to attack her has been Dr. Mann. 2:05:04 Mr. Lahood questions Dr. Mann about his defamation lawsuit. Dr. Mann refuses to comment. 2:06:00 Dr. Mann denies calling anyone on the panel a "denier." This is true for his ORAL statement but not his WRITTEN testimony which is actually more important for the record. So we see that Dr. Mann is a hypocrite for claiming he is a victim when it is he himself who is name calling. hypocrite noun A person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives. 2:08:30 Chairman Smith confirms Dr. Mann's written testimony on page 6 concerning his use of the word "denier." 2:11:46 Dr. Mann admits that he called Dr. Curry a denier in his written statement. Hearing- Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method (Version 2) House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology Published on Mar 29, 2017 Date: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 - 10:00am Location: 2318 Rayburn House Office Building Climate Science: Assumptions, Policy Implications, and the Scientific Method Dr. Judith Curry President, Climate Forecast Applications Network; Professor Emeritus, Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. John Christy Professor and Director, Earth System Science Center, NSSTC, University of Alabama at Huntsville; State Climatologist, Alabama Dr. Michael Mann Distinguished Professor of Atmospheric Science, Pennsylvania State University; Director, Earth System Science Center (ESSC), Pennsylvania State University Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. Professor, Environmental Studies Department, University of Colorado

• published: 15 Apr 2017
• views: 11336