Comments on: Global Warming: That Pesky Data

By: Benedict

Benedict — Tue, 05 Jul 2005 22:20:46 +0000

BUSH A CRICHTONIST ON GLOBAL WARMING Drudge is currently splashing the headline "BUSH: CLIMATE CHANGE MANMADE TO 'CERTAIN EXTENT'", accurately quoting - although mischaracterizing - this story from today's Los Angeles Times (the LATimes' story itself carries the much less sensationa...

By: 10k snooker » Blog Archive » Hockey Stick fraud

10k snooker » Blog Archive » Hockey Stick fraud — Thu, 30 Jun 2005 14:42:53 +0000

[...] Looks like the ‘hockey stick’ is going under the microscope. There has been along running issue with the authors of this global warming clap trap, that being the code and data used to predict the dire warming has been hidden from the public and other researchers. More reference information here. [...]

By: John A

John A — Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:54:31 +0000

Why is it that the only study the committee is interested in is Mann, Bradley and Hughes from way back in 1998?

I think the answer is, is that this study, and its extension (MBH99) which added Southern Hemisphere proxies and became a global study, formed a key part of the scientific basis used in the IPCC Third Assessment Report in 2001. On the foundation of this study alone, came the statement about the 20th Century warming being unprecedented in the last 1000 years and that 1998 was the warmest year in a millennium. Mann wrote the key chapter in the TAR that featured his own study.

From the TAR came the full court press to ratify the Kyoto Protocol and the current media scare over man-made climate change.

Now multiple research teams have published clear and serious problems with the data, analysis, methodology, synthesis and hence conclusions of this key study.

Now Congress wants to know whether it has allowed multiple millions to be misspent on worthless research. Hence the investigation.

By: John

John — Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:23:36 +0000

If the Hockey Stick proves to be a myth then the proponents of anthropogenic global warming will have a few problems. There is a body of research that says that during the Medieval Warm Period temperatures were warmer than today and there's a body of evidence that says that temperatures have been warmer in the last 1000 years than Mann & Bradley claim. Together they would show (a) that the recent warming is nothing abnormal and (b) temperatures rise without increases in carbon dioxide, and these would burst a few cherished beliefs.

(Those of us who are more sceptical of claims and have investigated the data for ourselves know this is the case any how.)

By the way, not only is 1998 the warmest year in the last 120 years but since January 2002 the temperature trend is flat - no increase and no decrease. In other words for the last three and a half years any claims that global warming is happening, let alone increasing, are simply a lie.

cheers

By: Synthstuff - music, photography and more...

Synthstuff - music, photography and more... — Wed, 29 Jun 2005 07:54:46 +0000

Squeaking wheel? Meet Grease!

Two wonderful links regarding the Mann, et. al. ‘paper’ relating the inexorable rise in global temperatures over the last 40 years or so. And the great curiosity of the United States Committee on Energy and Commerce. Here is the Hockey...

By: ÃanÃ

ÃanÃ — Tue, 28 Jun 2005 16:21:40 +0000

As to the importance of this result it is one of the main pillars of the climate change hypothesis. Knock this out and there would be problems. Climate change might very well still be happening, but the research would have to find new evidence.

I fully expect Inquistions on the other teams of scientists who find the same thing. Do keep us informed, Steve. Also let us know when Barton looks into Creation Science, John Lott's mendacity, Fred Singer's bull----, JunkScience's funding, how the Vioxx scientists tested their data, where RoyalDutchShell got their reserve forecasts...

ÃanÃ

By: Deltoid » Joe Barton (R-Exxon) vs hockey stick

Deltoid » Joe Barton (R-Exxon) vs hockey stick — Tue, 28 Jun 2005 09:03:46 +0000

[...] creators of the global warming hockey stick are –shall we say– pucked.” Steve Verdon: “there seems to be a pattern with regards to climate scientists and their wil [...]

By: Swanky Conservative » Blog Archive » Climate Change researchers get high-sticked

Tue, 28 Jun 2005 05:08:40 +0000

[...] when Brian Doherty reported at Reason that the model was flawed, at best. Steve Verdon at Outside the Beltway reports that the House Committee on Energy and Commerce is asking a few quest [...]

By: Steve Verdon

Steve Verdon — Tue, 28 Jun 2005 04:55:28 +0000

No Hal, it isn't funny in that McIntyre and McKitrick (MM) are the ones who pointed out the problems with Mann et. al. methodology. I've been following this from pretty early on when MM were just starting out on this research. McIntyre looked at the hockey stick and said it looked alot like some mining reports he'd seen...usually bogus reports about how a mine was just about to make all the investors super rich. As to the importance of this result it is one of the main pillars of the climate change hypothesis. Knock this out and there would be problems. Climate change might very well still be happening, but the research would have to find new evidence.

By: RELIAPUNDIT

RELIAPUNDIT — Tue, 28 Jun 2005 04:44:49 +0000

KILIMANJARO'S SHRINKING GLACIER AND GLOBAL WARMING: A MOUNTAIN OF LIES

By: The Astute Blogger

The Astute Blogger — Tue, 28 Jun 2005 04:42:54 +0000

Green Alps

By: Hal

Hal — Tue, 28 Jun 2005 04:36:28 +0000

Hmmm. Why is it that the only study the committee is interested in is Mann, Bradley and Hughes from way back in 1998? Further, why are all the questions of the form âCan you explain why you made all the errors detailed in Mcintyre and McKitrickâs Energy and Environment paper?â.

Funny, that.

By: Paul

Paul — Tue, 28 Jun 2005 04:16:30 +0000

yahooskies!

By: Wizbang

Wizbang — Tue, 28 Jun 2005 04:16:18 +0000

Hocky Stick Graph Creators Iced

Steve Verdon over at OTB gives us good news. It appears that Mann et. al. have drawn the attention of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. They have a few questions to ask. 1) Your curriculum vitae, including, but not...

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Tue, 28 Jun 2005 02:45:15 +0000

It's a huge problem of credibility.

While the data for the long-term temperature trends (including the various highs and lows over the past 2,000 years) is not from direct measurment, but instead from indirect measurement (especially tree rings), it looks pretty solid.

By looking at long term trends, it's clear that today's temperatures are below those experienced in recent historical times. If that's the case, then you need strong data to justify panic.

By providing no data, just a "my research says," the work repudiates itself.