At WUWT – The behind-the-scenes bumbling of the “hockey stick”.
15 Replies to “Climategate 2.0: He Shoots….”
The most damning phrase WRT the “hockey stick” is Phil Jones comment: “repeating an analysis with exactly the same data is normally very difficult.”
If one has a working algorithm, then it should produce the same results every time the program is run with identical data. Perhaps the CRU problem was their constant tweaking of programs without documenting any of the changes as well as their inability to remember where they’d put data sets. If the consequences of the data analysis weren’t so serious it would be humorous. Given the financial impact on the worlds economy as a result of these “climate scientists” work, then the errors should be treated as criminal negligence. (Interesting subconscious error when I first typed in “slimate cientists” which probably best describes this group of criminals).
A basic requirement of the scientific method is the results of any hypothesis must be repeatable by independent researchers. Mann’s graph fails that basic test and the whole AGW scam based on that graph is invalid.
The real kicker is that actual temperature data collected worldwide since the graph was presented, simply does not follow the prediction. The ‘alarming accelerated’ warming didn’t happen.
My favorite thing about computers, garbage in equals garbage out. Activists will always get the statistics that benefit their cause by tweaking the information until it suits their need.
I blame this on the tree ring workers .
The biggest fraud of the last century and it continues into this century.
Hey, North of 60:
“A basic requirement of the scientific method is the results of any hypothesis must be repeatable by independent researchers. ”
The fact is that Mann’s algorithm for processing the data could produce the hockey stick graph even using random, “red noise” data. The NAS/Wegman commission and Steve McIntyre documented that. So how much more repeatable can he get?
McCain and Lieberman, who are fighting to represent what the legitimate scientific community has to say, need to be prepared in case the special interests try to use this. Hence, the short response I sent out. [Mike Mann]
WTF was Mccain in the George Soros Camp? What a piece of dog shit!
New reality show: “Those Darn Trees!”
This quote from Climate gate 2.0 is hilarious. I’m sure there are scientists all over the world rolling on the floor laughing as they read it.
“This has been in the literature for a while, as you know much better than I do, and was not highlighted by Rosanne in her talk, but some committee members jumped on it in questions, and she was not convincing that trees were thermometers when it was warm a millennium ago but are not thermometers when it is warm now.”
If the Greenites stick their heads in a paper bag and inhale enough CO2, ii may stop them from hyperventilating.
I specifically recommend only paper bags, as these people aren’t mature enough to handle plastic bags safely.
Mann’s hypothesis was that temperature data from the past 200 years showed an alarming increase in temperature since the 60s.
However, when independent researchers used actual temperature data that wasn’t ‘edited’ and ‘calibrated’ by Mann and his AGW colleagues the alarming increase wasn’t there. Garbage in = garbage out. http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/03/direct-evidence-that-most-u-s-warming-since-1973-could-be-spurious/
Double major for “high sticking”.
does the law of supply and demand apply to hypocrisy?
citation after citation from Wikipedia and Wikileaks here @ SDA ONLY when it promotes the right wing agenda.
why are you people so afraid of the truth?
Banana….do you know the truth?
Intelligent people are able to discern truth from fiction regardless of the source. Stupid people only go to sources that parrot their preconceived ideas. They know how they feel and don’t want to be confused by pesky facts.
I have been trying to follow this story ever since the first e-mails came out on Climate Audit, and the only conclusion I’ve come to is that no one human being could ever make sense of this mess. In a perfect world they would dump everything written on Climate Science in the last few decades and start from scratch. There are way too many PhDs out there fighting for tenure.
The most damning phrase WRT the “hockey stick” is Phil Jones comment:
“repeating an analysis with exactly the same data is normally very difficult.”
If one has a working algorithm, then it should produce the same results every time the program is run with identical data. Perhaps the CRU problem was their constant tweaking of programs without documenting any of the changes as well as their inability to remember where they’d put data sets. If the consequences of the data analysis weren’t so serious it would be humorous. Given the financial impact on the worlds economy as a result of these “climate scientists” work, then the errors should be treated as criminal negligence. (Interesting subconscious error when I first typed in “slimate cientists” which probably best describes this group of criminals).
A basic requirement of the scientific method is the results of any hypothesis must be repeatable by independent researchers. Mann’s graph fails that basic test and the whole AGW scam based on that graph is invalid.
The real kicker is that actual temperature data collected worldwide since the graph was presented, simply does not follow the prediction. The ‘alarming accelerated’ warming didn’t happen.
My favorite thing about computers, garbage in equals garbage out. Activists will always get the statistics that benefit their cause by tweaking the information until it suits their need.
I blame this on the tree ring workers .
The biggest fraud of the last century and it continues into this century.
Hey, North of 60:
“A basic requirement of the scientific method is the results of any hypothesis must be repeatable by independent researchers. ”
The fact is that Mann’s algorithm for processing the data could produce the hockey stick graph even using random, “red noise” data. The NAS/Wegman commission and Steve McIntyre documented that. So how much more repeatable can he get?
McCain and Lieberman, who are fighting to represent what the legitimate scientific community has to say, need to be prepared in case the special interests try to use this. Hence, the short response I sent out. [Mike Mann]
WTF was Mccain in the George Soros Camp? What a piece of dog shit!
New reality show: “Those Darn Trees!”
This quote from Climate gate 2.0 is hilarious. I’m sure there are scientists all over the world rolling on the floor laughing as they read it.
“This has been in the literature for a while, as you know much better than I do, and was not highlighted by Rosanne in her talk, but some committee members jumped on it in questions, and she was not convincing that trees were thermometers when it was warm a millennium ago but are not thermometers when it is warm now.”
If the Greenites stick their heads in a paper bag and inhale enough CO2, ii may stop them from hyperventilating.
I specifically recommend only paper bags, as these people aren’t mature enough to handle plastic bags safely.
Mann’s hypothesis was that temperature data from the past 200 years showed an alarming increase in temperature since the 60s.
However, when independent researchers used actual temperature data that wasn’t ‘edited’ and ‘calibrated’ by Mann and his AGW colleagues the alarming increase wasn’t there. Garbage in = garbage out.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/03/direct-evidence-that-most-u-s-warming-since-1973-could-be-spurious/
Double major for “high sticking”.
does the law of supply and demand apply to hypocrisy?
citation after citation from Wikipedia and Wikileaks here @ SDA ONLY when it promotes the right wing agenda.
why are you people so afraid of the truth?
Banana….do you know the truth?
Intelligent people are able to discern truth from fiction regardless of the source. Stupid people only go to sources that parrot their preconceived ideas. They know how they feel and don’t want to be confused by pesky facts.
I have been trying to follow this story ever since the first e-mails came out on Climate Audit, and the only conclusion I’ve come to is that no one human being could ever make sense of this mess. In a perfect world they would dump everything written on Climate Science in the last few decades and start from scratch. There are way too many PhDs out there fighting for tenure.