Hockey Stick 30 years of junk science

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Sunsettommy, Apr 26, 2018.

  1. Sunsettommy
    Offline

    Sunsettommy Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2018
    Messages:
    930
    Thanks Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    45
    Ratings:
    +747
    A paper by Dr. Mann et al, was published in 1998 making outlandish claims (covering only the Northern Hemisphere) that crept into the 2001 IPCC report despite not being validated or reproduced by anyone.

    Because of the dishonest support by the IPCC, it got undeserved support because NO ONE has yet posted a paper reproducing it thus a paper sailed through without knowing if it was good or bad.

    Eventually the paper was exposed as junk by THIS PAPER in 2005 that set off a firestorm.

    Today only silly warmists cling to this massive failure despite that it contradicted decades of research, that it covers only the continental Northern hemisphere.

    His main proxy, Bristlecone Pine tree data was taken from a 1993 paper by Isdo and Graybill, as shown HERE

    McKitrick stated:

    "A very brief summary of the problems of the hockey stick would go like this. Mann’s algorithm, applied to a large proxy data set, extracted the shape associated with one small and controversial subset of the tree rings records, namely the bristlecone pine cores from high and arid mountains in the US Southwest. The trees are extremely long-lived, but grow in highly contorted shapes as bark dies back to a single twisted strip. The scientists who published the data (Graybill and Idso 1993) had specifically warned that the ring widths should not be used for temperature reconstruction, and in particular their 20th century portion is unlike the climatic history of the region, and is probably biased by other factors."

    bolding mine

    The paper is wrong in so many ways.....................
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. flacaltenn
    Offline

    flacaltenn Senior Mod Staff Member Senior USMB Moderator Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    44,996
    Thanks Received:
    7,358
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +25,653
    Only honest ancient proxy researcher of the lot was Marcott. He emphasized that his study (some of the same proxies used by others) did not have ANY temporal resolution beyond a couple hundred years when the data preparation was done. And only MINIMAL temporal resolution over a 500 year period.

    So they are NOT measuring ancient temperatures and finding trends anywhere NEAR the modern record. It's all just looking at a highly filtered low resolution running mean.

    You can't deduce CRAP about monthly, yearly, decadal variations from ANY of them.

    But the DISHONEST ones like Mann -- simply spliced the modern record with DAILY temporal resolution right onto the sparse and variance free ancient records. That's actually fraudulent to ANY reasonable scientist.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. Sunsettommy
    Offline

    Sunsettommy Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2018
    Messages:
    930
    Thanks Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    45
    Ratings:
    +747
    Marcott has a stated average resolution of 120 years, while most thermometers have a resolution in minutes......

    Proxy and Temperature data don't match at all.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. Billy_Bob
    Online

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    12,358
    Thanks Received:
    2,432
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +10,409
    Trying to get any of the alarmists here to understand spatial resolution is a errand in futility. I've been trying for several years here now to teach some to no avail. They simply can not understand how placing today going backwards into a 500 year average (the average of most long term proxies) would wipe out their little warming blip, unlike Mann's deception.
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2018
  5. edthecynic
    Offline

    edthecynic Censored for Cynicism

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    32,242
    Thanks Received:
    3,885
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +9,073
    Don't you deniers ever get tired of posting the same debunked lies????

    Mann's hockey stick has been confirmed over and over again by many different proxies as well as direct instrument measurement.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 4
    • Funny Funny x 2
  6. bear513
    Offline

    bear513 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2012
    Messages:
    38,062
    Thanks Received:
    4,860
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +23,831



    tombstone-web1.jpg
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 2
  7. bear513
    Offline

    bear513 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2012
    Messages:
    38,062
    Thanks Received:
    4,860
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +23,831

    Wait a second " direct instrument measurement "


    Say What??????



    Bhahahahahahahaha
     
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 4
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. Billy_Bob
    Online

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    12,358
    Thanks Received:
    2,432
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +10,409
    I see your using the Karl Et AL output data for your graphs. Have you removed the intentional bias that was applied? I believe it was 0.48degC that was used to change the last 100 years upward and hide the MEWP and RWP..

    I also noticed that you also attached the empirical (and heavily adjusted upward) record to the proxy record backwards. You do realize that the last 100 years in the bottom graph should be reduced to a single point after an average was made... Don't you?

    You made the same failed and deceptive lies that Hansen did along with all of his other followers, who lie to try and give him credibility... WHat do you call a group of people who use the same deception techniques over and over again after they have been shown it is deception?
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2018
  9. Billy_Bob
    Online

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    12,358
    Thanks Received:
    2,432
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +10,409
    Direct measurement only goes back to about the early 1800's...

    He is so full of crap it isn't funny..
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. bear513
    Offline

    bear513 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2012
    Messages:
    38,062
    Thanks Received:
    4,860
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +23,831

    I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt and maybe it was a typo or he was not thinking clearly ...
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1

Share This Page