jump to navigation

Hide the Decline explained March 10, 2011

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , , ,

Hide the Decline explained

The Tree Ring Circus July 28, 2010

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , , ,

The Tree Ring Circus

By John Dawson
Quadrant Online, July 28, 2010

The Hockey Stick Illusion is the shocking story of a graph called the Hockey Stick. It is also a textbook of tree ring analysis, a code-breaking adventure, an intriguing detective story, an exposé of a scientific and political travesty, and the tale of a herculean struggle between a self-funded sceptic and a publicly funded hydra, all presented in the measured style of an analytical treatise. The hero of the story is Steve McIntyre, honourably assisted by fellow sceptics, especially by Ross McKitrick. The villain is Michael Mann, dishonourably assisted by global warming alarmists, especially by his “Hockey Team”. The bare bones of the Hockey Stick story are as follows.

In its First Assessment Report published in 1990, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) presented the conventional view of climate history: that around a thousand years ago there was a Medieval Warm Period, followed by a Little Ice Age, followed by the Current Warm Period that has not yet reached the temperatures experienced during the Medieval Warm Period. In 1995 the IPCC’s Second Assessment Report presented that view again but introduced some doubt about the Medieval Warm Period, suggesting that further investigation was required. It had dawned on global warming crusaders that the Medieval Warm Period was a huge problem for the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) hypothesis and that fame and fortune awaited a scientist who could get rid of it.

The scientist who took the prize was a brash and ambitious American paleoclimatologist, Dr Michael Mann. With two of his more senior colleagues, Mann set about investigating the earth’s temperature over the last millennium by scouring the world’s research projects that had detected past temperatures by way of temperature “proxies” such as tree rings. The amount of data they collated and the sophistication of their statistical analysis, claimed Mann, ensured that their conclusions would be more “robust” than those of previous studies. Their first peer-reviewed paper (MBH98) was published in the prestigious journal Nature in 1998 and their second (MBH99) was published in Geophysical Research Letters (GRL) in 1999. The graphed summation of these papers wiped the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age out of the picture and replaced them with a flat-lined handle declining slightly from 1000 to 1900 then bending upwards into a twentieth-century blade of rapidly rising temperatures.

This “Hockey Stick” graph was immediately seized by AGW crusaders. Typical of the reaction was that of Gerry North of Texas A&M University who enthused: “The planet had been cooling slowly until 120 years ago, when, bam!, it jumps up … We’ve been breaking our backs on [greenhouse] detection, but I found the 1000-year records more convincing than any of our detection studies.” Almost overnight the Hockey Stick became the new gold standard of paleoclimatology.

Read the rest here

Faith in global warming wanes March 11, 2010

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , , ,

Faith in global warming wanes

By Brian Winter
Tennessean.com, March 11, 2010

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. — The violent threats are not what bother Michael Mann the most. He’s used to them.

Instead, it’s the fact that his life’s work — the effort to stop global warming — has been under siege since last fall. That’s when Mann suddenly found himself in the middle of the so-called “climategate” scandal, in which more than 1,000 e-mails among top climate scientists — including Mann — were obtained illegally by hackers and published on the Internet.

The controversy has contributed to a fundamental shift in efforts to stop global warming, forcing environmentalists to scale down long-held ambitions and try to win back an increasingly skeptical American public. Walter Russell Mead of the Council on Foreign Relations, a New York-based think tank, says recent events may be causing “the death of the global warming movement as we know it.”

The e-mails showed some of the scientists sharing doubts about just how fast the Earth’s temperature is rising, questioning the work of other researchers and refusing to share data with the public. Critics, including Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., have seized on the e-mails as proof that Mann and his colleagues deliberately exaggerated the scientific case behind global warming.

Read the rest here

Climategate Used to Settle ‘Vendetta,’ Says Mann December 2, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , , ,
1 comment so far

Climategate Used to Settle ‘Vendetta,’ Says Mann

AccuWeather.com, December 2, 2009

Michael Mann in an Exclusive
Interview with AccuWeather.com

Michael Mann, Penn State University meteorology professor, said Climategate is an attack on man-made global warming scientists.

“I think it is unfortunate that some scientists out there are using this situation to settle personal scores, to settle a vendetta,” Mann said, in an exclusive interview with AccuWeather.com’s Katie Fehlinger.

Mann said that the e-mail leak happened just in time for the Dec. 7, 2009, United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, where world leaders, including President Obama, hope to come to an agreement on a framework for future international climate change mitigation.

“It is not a coincidence… that this event happened in the weeks leading up to the summit in Copenhagen,” said Mann. “They’ve taken scientists’ words and phrases and quoted them out of context, completely misrepresenting what they were saying.”

Despite skepticism, Mann insisted that global warming is real.

“My main interest right now is to make sure that this manufactured controversy does not distract policy makers,” said Mann.

Ultimately, Mann feels that scientists are not holding climate change data back from the public.

“The community is doing a good job at putting the data out there… there really is nothing to hide,” Mann said.

Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) from which questionable global warming e-mails were leaked, temporarily stepped down from his position yesterday to allow investigation to continue without disruption.

Mann protected his work and the work of his peers as Penn State launched an investigation into what critics call a fabrication of global warming data.

“Phil Jones is a very honest scientist,” Mann said. “He was probably talking about getting rid of measurements that they didn’t consider reliable.”

Read the rest here

BREAKING: CRU says leaked data is real November 20, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

HadleyCRU says leaked data is real

Via TBR.cc, November 20, 2009

The director of Britain’s leading Climate Research Unit, Phil Jones, has told Investigate magazine’s TGIF Edition tonight that his organization has been hacked, and the data flying all over the internet appears to be genuine.

In an exclusive interview, Jones told TGIF, “It was a hacker. We were aware of this about three or four days ago that someone had hacked into our system and taken and copied loads of data files and emails.”

“Have you alerted police”

“Not yet. We were not aware of what had been taken.”

Jones says he was first tipped off to the security breach by colleagues at the website RealClimate.

“Real Climate were given information, but took it down off their site and told me they would send it across to me. They didn’t do that. I only found out it had been released five minutes ago.”

TGIF asked Jones about the controversial email discussing “hiding the decline”, and Jones explained what he was trying to say….

Read the rest here

That famous consensus February 7, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

That famous consensus

From The Spectator, February 7, 2009

By Melanie Phillips

Yet another example of the bogus ‘research’ masquerading as science that is used to reinforce the man-made global warming fraud. One of the difficulties the green zealots have had is that Antarctica has been not warming but cooling, with the extent of its ice reaching record levels. A few weeks ago, a study led by Professor Eric Steig caused some excitement by claiming that actually West Antarctica was warming so much that it more than made up for the cooling in East Antarctica. Warning bells should have sounded when Steig said

What we did is interpolate carefully instead of just using the back of an envelope.

To those of us who have been following this scam for the past two decades, ‘interpolate carefully’ sounds like a bit of, er, creative calculation. And so it has proved. Various scientists immediately spotted the flaw in Steig’s methodology of combining satellite evidence since 1979 with temperature readings from surface weather stations. The flaw they identified was that, since Antarctica has so few weather stations, the computer Steig used was programmed to guess what data they would have produced had such stations existed. In other words, the findings that caused such excitement were based on data that had been made up.

Even one of the IPCC’s lead authors sniffed a problem:

‘This looks like a pretty good analysis, but I have to say I remain somewhat skeptical,’ Kevin Trenberth, climate analysis chief at the National Center for Atmospheric Research said in an e-mail. ‘It is hard to make data where none exist.’

Well, yes. But then the invention of data that does not exist and the obliteration of data that does exist has been precisely how the man-made global warming fraud has been perpetrated right from the get-go. The most egregious example of this was the piece of ‘research’ that underpinned the entire IPCC/Kyoto shebang from 2001 when it was published — the so-called ‘hockey stick’ curve, which purported to show a vertiginous and unprecedented rise in global temperature in the 20th century.

The problem with pegging such a rise to the evils of industrialisation had always been the Medieval Warm Period, during which global temperatures were warmer than in modern times. So the ‘hockey stick’ study dealt with that by simply managing to airbrush out the Medieval Warm Period and its subsequent corrective Little Ice Age altogether. Some seven centuries of global history were simply excised from the data — because an algorithm had been built into the computer programme which would have been created a ‘hockey stick’ curve whatever data were fed into it.

This shoddy research was subsequently torn apart so comprehensively that it has been called the most discredited study in the history of science (and has been quietly dropped by the IPCC, leaving man-made global warming theory with no more substance than the grin on the face of the Cheshire Cat. Go here, here and here for a history of the titanic battle that ensued over its unmasking). The creator of this bogus ‘hockey stick’ curve was Michael Mann. And guess what? Michael Mann was a co-author of the Steig study of Antarctica.

‘Contrarians have sometime grabbed on to this idea that the entire continent of Antarctica is cooling, so how could we be talking about global warming,’ said study co-author Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University. ‘Now we can say: no, it’s not true … It is not bucking the trend.’

And now as Andrew Bolt has noted Steve McIntyre, who with Ross McKitrick uncovered the ‘hockey-stick’ fraud in the first place, has delivered the coup de grace to the Steig/Mann Antarctica claim. Steig used data from a weather station called Harry. Bolt observes:

Harry in fact is a problematic site that was buried in snow for years and then re-sited in 2005. But, worse, the data that Steig used in his modelling which he claimed came from Harry was actually old data from another station on the Ross Ice Shelf known as Gill with new data from Harry added to it, producing the abrupt warming. The data is worthless. Or as McIntyre puts it:

Considered by itself, Gill has a slightly negative trend from 1987 to 2002. The big trend in ‘New Harry’ arises entirely from the impact of splicing the two data sets together. It’s a mess.

With their reputations thus disappearing faster than the snows of Kilimanjaro, the zealots have become hysterical. Mann attacks a prominent sceptic, Lawrence Solomon, for citing the scientists’ criticisms of the Antarctica study, and is in turn answered by Solomon — an exchange reproduced in Canada’s Financial Post, for which Solomon writes, here and here. Mann repeatedly accuses Solomon of lying. In doing so, he has left himself dramatically exposed. Claiming that Solomon

repeatedly lies about my work

he cites as evidence of this that his ‘hockey stick’ study was

vindicated in a report by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences

and seeks to back up this assertion by citing the way the media reported this study as

‘Science Panel Backs Study on Warming Climate’ (New York Times), ‘Backing for Hockey Stick Graph’ (BBC), and so on.

This is, to put it mildly, disingenuous. While it is certainly true that the media reported it in this sheep-like way — thanks in part to the manner in which the NAS chose circumspectly to spin its own conclusions — it is nevertheless the case that in every important particular the NAS actually agreed with the McIntyre/McKitrick criticisms. Far from vindicating the ‘hockey stick’ graph, the NAS said that although it found some of Mann’s work ‘plausible’, there were so many scientific uncertainties attached to it that it did not have great confidence in it. Thus it said that

Mann et al. used a type of principal component analysis that tends to bias the shape of the reconstructions

and that he had downplayed the

uncertainties of the published reconstructions…Even less confidence can be placed in the original conclusions by Mann et al. (1999) that ‘the 1990s are likely the warmest decade, and 1998 the warmest year, in at least a millennium.’

What Mann also does not say in his diatribe is that a subsequent House Energy and Commerce Committee report chaired by Edward Wegman totally destroyed the credibility of the ‘hockey stick’ study and devastatingly ripped apart Mann’s methodology as ‘bad mathematics’. Furthermore, when Gerald North, the chairman of the NAS panel — which Mann claims ‘vindicated him’ – and panel member Peter Bloomfield were asked at the House Committee hearings whether or not they agreed with Wegman’s harsh criticisms, they said they did:

CHAIRMAN BARTON. Dr. North, do you dispute the conclusions or the methodology of Dr. Wegman’s report?

DR. NORTH. No, we don’t. We don’t disagree with their criticism. In fact, pretty much the same thing is said in our report.

DR. BLOOMFIELD. Our committee reviewed the methodology used by Dr. Mann and his co-workers and we felt that some of the choices they made were inappropriate. We had much the same misgivings about his work that was documented at much greater length by Dr. Wegman.

WALLACE: ‘the two reports were complementary, and to the extent that they overlapped, the conclusions were quite consistent.’ (Am Stat Assoc.)

As Mark Twain might have put it, there are three kinds of lies — lies, damned lies and global warming science.

Warmist ‘hockey stick’ smashed up November 26, 2008

Posted by honestclimate in Temperature.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

Warmist ‘hockey stick’ smashed up

By Christopher Chantrill

From the American Thinker, November 24, 2008

They smashed up the “hockey stick” at Climate Audit on Sunday. The “hockey stick” is a chart developed by Michael Mann et al. ten years ago that showed that global temperatures were pretty constant until about 100 years ago when they began to shoot up (hence “hockey stick”).  It was based on a statistical analysis of numerous temperature “proxies” such as tree ring width on bristle-cone pine trees.

Willis Eschenbach of climateaudit.org did some statistical analysis of his own.  He asked: which of the Mannian temperature proxies actually carry the “hockey-stick” signal?

The answer was devastating.  Out of the 95 data series in the latest Mann paper that covered the entire last 1,000 years, only 25 carried the “hockey stick” signal.  Three of these series are lake sediments in Finland which are corrupted by recent urban development and the rest are from bristle-cone pine trees in the US Southwest that have been challenged by other researchers.
Take the “hockey stick” proxies out and you get a signal that shows a Medieval Warming Period a thousand years ago and a Little Ice Age 300 years ago.  What a surprise!


Will the Real Hockey Stick Please Stand Up? October 12, 2008

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

Will the Real Hockey Stick Please Stand Up?

From the Air Vent Blog, October 11, 2008

I won’ t abuse you with my venting today. Mostly pictures. Pretty interesting ones I think.

I used the CPS method today with actual proxies from M08. Instead of the infilled data with the fake hockey stick glued on the end I used the original original 1357 series before processing. I also chopped off the 95 Luterbacher series which aren’t really proxies, they are temperature. It didn’t make any big difference to the shape of graphs in my results but I don’t like em.

There are more pre-deletion Luterbacher series in this data set because they were re-scrambled from 95 into 71 series for M08 most likely using RegEm according to their locations. I previously did a software pattern match for the original 89 Luter to the final 71 and found no match, yet the average was the same.

Anyway, to the fun. I used M08 CPS and r correlation to scale and sort data according to different trends. The point of this article is to show you can produce any trend you want from this method. ANYTHING!

The red line is the temperature trend I am claiming in each graph was true. The blue is the CPS algorithm temperature reconstruction. Since the big claim in M08 was the percentage of series which passed correlation 484 of 1209 take a look at the Percent used in the graphs below.

200 year Hockey stick

Read the rest of the article, click below link


See also: Building a “Hockey” stick


Michael Mann’s Lecture at URI and the “blogger who must not be named” October 10, 2008

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,
add a comment

Michael Mann’s Lecture at URI and the “blogger who must not be named””

From Watt’s Up with That, October 10, 2008

Dr. Michael Mann gives a lecture on his work at the University of Rhode Island.

For the rest of the videos click below link, make sure to watch the last video on Q&A where Mann squirms at the questions relating to his “hockey stick”.