"Hockey stick" debunking

The research which looked at the now infamous "hockey stick" graph showing world temperature data over the last 1000 years is finally getting published in a peer reviewed journal (Geophysical Research Letters). The arguments were around for a while but were pushed aside by the politically correct crowd which accepted as orthodoxy that of course, the Earth is getting warmer and, of course, it is caused by human activity.

The problem with the hockey stick graph appears to be that whatever set of data ("red noise") one feeds into the model used, in 99% of cases it produces a "hockey stick" graph. You could feed in the milk consumption data in 50 countries and out would come the hockey stick graph.

That I knew for a while. What I did not pay attention to was the fact that the initial data series for the entire study was the tree-ring data of only one particular species of trees - the high altitude bristlecone pine. How this part was not questioned before is beyond me. Extrapolating from one data series for one species of tree climate data for the entire planet? How about some other data like ice cap size or other types of trees?

The scientist who "believe" are responding to the new study with characteristic scientific vigor and argumentation: "This is simply pure and unadulterated rubbish" to quote one of them. Nice argument. I wonder where his grant money comes from.


On the Breeze said…
Science is a rhetoric.

Every time I hear an impassioned plea that industrial nations return to the stone age to save the planet, I think of an episode of Dr. Who. (I think that was it.) A society of space aliens had a "disease" running rampant through the population. It looked like leprosy. They were ostracizing the individuals who had it. The disease turned out to be the next highest phase of their physical development. They didn't know because they didn't do honest study of history or honest science - they bullied each other with rumor and superstition and crackpot analogies instead.

Popular posts from this blog

Russia's Geopolitical problem with China

Unconditional Love

I am for "enthusiastic consent", maybe even "repeated enthusiastic consent"