Keep scrolling: Check out some of these 50+ Michael Mann ClimateGate emails

• Priceless ClimateGate email 682: Tom Wigley tells Michael Mann that his son did a tree ring science fair project (using trees behind NCAR) that invalidated the centerpiece of Mann's work
• ClimateGate scientists on Michael Mann and his work: "probable flaws" and "clearly deficient", and "crap" and "way too defensive", oh my!
• 2002 Briffa email mentions Mann's "diminishing support" and the "questionable nature of much of Mann's verbiage"; says "Mike could be a lot more open about the real uncertainty of his early temperature estimates"
• Walking the walk: Warmist Mann to Warmist Jones: "looking forward to seeing you in Tahiti, we can enjoy some nice tropical drinks w/ umbrellas in them"
• Email 2743, Sept 2009, Michael "Robust Debate" Mann: "So far, we've simply deleted all of the attempts by McIntyre and his minions to draw attention to this at RealClimate."
• Email 3874: Mann sends email trashing McKitrick and McIntyre to his "Friends and Colleagues" at the New York Times, Environmental Defense Fund, EPA, and Senator Lieberman's office among others
• For Michael Mann, oh, what a tangled web: In a 2003 ClimateGate email, he claims that "the proxy reconstructions show the post-1980 warming"
• Email 3499: Michael Mann provides some code, cautions "don't pass it along where it may get into the hands of the wrong people"; admits something "a bit odd" that "increases the amplitude of the reconstruction everywhere by the factor 1.29"
• In case you missed it: Hockey stick co-author: "it may be that Mann et al simply don't have the long-term trend right"; "I hedge my bets on whether there were any periods in Medieval times that might have been "warm", to the irritation of my co-authors!"
• Michael Mann, 2006: "we certainly don’t know the GLOBAL mean temperature anomaly very well, and nobody has ever claimed we do"
• Environmental Defense Fund aids Mann in rebutting McKitrick / McIntyre
• Phil Jones to Mann: "both of us think that you're on very dodgy ground...What the real world has done over the last 6000 years and what it ought to have done given our understandding of Milankovic forcing are two very different things"
• Michael "robust debate" Mann: "I never acknowledge emails from people I don't know, about topics that are in any way sensitive. this is a perfect example of something that goes right to the trash bin"
• 2005:Mann already lawyered up
• 2003, Mann: "NSF policy in no way legally requires funded scientists to provided their data (let alone computer codes!) for public access"
• Michael "robust debate" Mann on the opportunity to robustly debate Steve McIntyre: "Phil, I would immediately delete anything you receive from this fraud...I would NOT RESPOND to this guy. As you know, only bad things can come of that"
•  Email 1103, Sept 1999, Michael Mann on the use of questionable data: "I'm happy to do it and let the reviewers tell us if they see any problem"
• Email 717, Sept 1998, Michael Mann disses climate modelers: "there are a few individuals in the modeling community who could benefit from slowing down on the stone throwing from their fragile glass tower"
• Email 1619, Nov 2003, Michael Mann offers a cover story in an attempt to explain why "the full data set could not be made available until a few years after the '98 study"
• Email 1045, May 1999, Michael Mann already more of an activist than a scientist?: "...I do presentations on capitol hill for USGCRP...Mostly, though, I've been trying to help Mike McCracken and company behind the scenes"
• Email 112, Feb 2007: Michael Mann lashes out at Curtis Covey, who dared to write things like "...the science is not yet settled" in an email to unbelievers Singer and Monckton
• Email 137, Sept 2006, warmist Jerry North asks Mann et al to share their data with McIntyre: "McIntyre does have a point in that most of our research has been supported by US Taxpayers...as scientists we all owe it to each other to share information to the maximum extent possible."
• Email 297, August 2004, Phil Jones and Michael Mann: This peer review process looks completely corrupt, with warmist Jones rejecting a paper by realists McKitrick and Michaels, and Mann somehow in the loop, wanting to use this "to help bolster the case against MM??"
• Email 239, Oct 2003, John Holdren defends Michael Mann's alarmism by stressing Mann's careful weasel wording
• Email 384, July 2004, Michael Mann to Pielke Sr.: "I would think it obvious that peer-review alone is *not* a sufficient to establish what is "good science""
• Email 1335, Nov 2005, Michael "Robust Debate" Mann on the prospect of attending a workshop also attended by a guy who disagrees with him: "If Zorita is in, I am out!'
• Email 1705, April 2002, what "settled" science looks like: After Michael Mann writes "There are some substantial scientific differences here, lets let them play out the way they are supposed to, objectively, and in the peer reviewed literature", Raymond Bradley writes to Briffa "excuse me while I VOMIT!!"
• Email 1544, Oct 2000, Phil Jones: "...warmer conditions than today during many summers from 1750 to 1850...Central England also shows little change in summer since the 18th century. Autumns for CET in the 1730s were clearly warmer than today. All somewhat perplexing"
• Email 2519, Oct 2003, Michael Mann on McIntyre and McKitrick: "If *others* want to say that their actions represent scientific fraud, intellectual dishonesty, etc. (as I think we all suspect they do), lets let *them* make these charges for us! Lets let our supporters in higher places use our scientific response to push the broader case against MM"
• Mail 3880, Mar 2000: Michael Mann agrees to let the CRU folks print T-shirts/polo shirts with Mann's hockey stick on the back
• Email 3115: Michael Mann again on refusing to communicate with the "idiots" and "losers" who dare to question Mann's work
• Michael Mann vs Michael Mann: Did I say that the hockey stick might qualify to be the "truth" as portrayed in the IPCC Policy Makers Summary? I meant it was an "obscure graph" that unnamed other people have made "appear more definitive than it was ever intended"
• Email 3046, July 2000, Michael Mann: "Our method, as you know, doesn't include any "splicing of two different datasets"-this is a myth perptuated by Singer and his band of hired guns"
• Email 3045, Michael Mann to Andy Revkin, Feb 2005: "The McIntyre and McKitrick paper is pure scientific fraud. I think you'll find this reinforced by just about any legitimate scientist in our field you discuss this with"
• Email 4936, Michael Mann in January 2007 claims that Caspar Ammann has "independently investigated the claims of our critics and shown them to be either incorrect, inconsequential, or both."
• Email 4911, Michael Mann, July 2007: "What McIntyre and his ilk are trying to do is to make doing science as unpleasant as possible for us. I suppose they think that discouraging the scientists is the best way to prevent the science from moving forward"
• Email 4907, Aug 2005: Michael Mann comes out against unprofessional email exchanges, and "inflammatory and ad hominem public commentary. There is no room for that on any side of the debate."
• Email 4768, Oct 2003, Michael Mann's psychological projection: He rants about the alleged "extremely dishonest", "really scandalous" things that McIntyre and McKitrick allegedly did
• Email 4763, June 2008: Michael Mann wants to highlight "how critical [Phil Jones'] efforts have been to developments in areas such as [Detection and Attribution]"
• Email 4749, July 2003, Michael Mann to WSJ reporter: Back when dinosaurs were wandering around near the poles, it was "almost" certainly warmer; this was allegedly "due to the influence of plate motion on the production of co2 by geological sources (e.g. volcanic outgassing)"
• Email 4657, Oct 2000, It's a small world after all: Editor of Journal of Climate, Michael Mann, gets Phil Jones to review a paper by Tom Wigley and Ben Santer
• Self-promotion of Mann to Warmist PR Machine
• Michael Mann on keeping up with the scientific literature: "I don't read E&E, gives me indigestion"
• Teamwork: Tight little group of warmists write letters to support Michael Mann's drive to make Phil Jones an AGU fellow
• I scratched your back, you scratch mine: After helping Phil Jones become an AGU fellow, Mike Mann asks Jones if he's interested in "returning the favor"
• Email 679: Michael Mann says that he knows Henry Waxman's staffers well; Phil Jones declines an offer to be interviewed for "The Great Global Warming Swindle"
• Email 4927: Michael Mann and Phil Jones conspiring to get a Nature paper in advance?
• 2003: Michael Mann on questions from McIntyre and McKitrick: A "highly organized industry PR firm...is behind this effort"
• 2003: Michael Mann on what "the community" should do to punish a journal that dared to print dissenting views on the climate hoax
• 2001: Before excusing himself to shovel snow, Michael Mann writes: "My own perception is that the climate community, modelers as well as observationalists, simply don't take seriously anymore the idea that the history of climate change over the past 1000 years is part of an internal oscillation"
• Someone get this man a thesaurus: As his global warming scam crumbled in Sept '09, overwrought warmist Michael Mann used the word "attack" three times in one hysterical sentence
• Mann: "it would be nice to try to "contain" the putative "MWP""; Jones: "I would hope that AGU/EOS 'publicity machine' will shout the message from rooftops everywhere"
• Briffa gives Mann a positive? reference, but includes phrases like "not sufficiently aware of the characteristics of some of the data with which he worked"; "overconfidence in his work which bordered on seeming arrogance"
• Planet-healer Michael Mann to Jones and Briffa et al in 1999, the year after he got his PhD: "I trust that history will give us all proper credit for what we're doing here."
• That was quick: Michael Mann on the just-released 5,000 ClimateGate 2.0 emails: "they look like mine but I hardly see anything that appears damning at all"