Hide the decline - satire on global warming alarmists

The video is being uploaded as it is being a subject of censorship by climate scientist Michael Mann - whether the data of his was forged or not the satire must not be censored!

Read more: http://minnesotansforglobalwarming.co...

• Category

  People & Blogs

[AlpineMusicSchool]

Michael Mann sucks hard.

[R0773N]

Michael Mann also lied about being a Nobel Peace Prize recipient. The Nobel committee said that despite his claims in his court briefing, he never won the Nobel Prize.

[cristop5]

I think it is important to be transparent about how the data is dealt with and presented. But grafting instrumental data onto proxy data in order to accurately depict a continuous temperature record is not fraud.

Nor is it "making up data" or "fudging the numbers" etc as this moronic video would have you believe.

[cristop5]

The NH tree ring data is regarded as reasonable for dates prior to ~1960. Up until this time it tracks the instrumental record reasonably well, and is also in step with other proxy data. Google the "tree ring divergence" problem.

[docmabuse66]

But the absence of the recent warming in the tree ring data implies, that the rest of the data (the past) very likely must also be wrong, so that MWP and LIA peaks are illustrated much too small on the left part of the hockeystick.

Do you think that it's no fraud to attach measured data onto a set of proven bad data - in which many decades of warming were completly missing - so that the past look much more constant?

When the data is not trustable...better not use it! (2/2)

[docmabuse66]

In my answer to your first post, I refered to the point that it must have been obvious for the hockeystick contributing climate scientists, that if their tree ring data was not trustable for the recent time, the dataset could also not be trustable for the past.

They explained that they deleted the decline and exchange it with measured data, because the real temperature increase after 1960 was not visible in the tree ring data. (1/2)

[bernzeppi]

What is most disturbing is that Willie Soon's paper which was central to some of the emails was immediately debunked after publication.

The whole point of peer review is to make sure the paper has robust data and rationale.

It obviously didn't but it appears that wasn't the goal...

Climategate broke a few weeks before Copenhagen and Soon's paper was central... and we find through FOI request in 2011 that Soon received over $1 million from Koch Bros and Heartland for his efforts.

It was a setup!

[bernzeppi]

Of course we all know that 'hide the decline' referred to the tree ring proxy data being in error so because Nat Geo wanted a graph with a single line (not the multiple traces originally proffered) they removed the influence of the tree rings.

Also the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the NSF carried out a detailed investigation. It agreed with the conclusions of the university inquiries, and exonerated Mann of charges of scientific misconduct.

So this IS 'satire', not truth.

Isn't it?

[cristop5]

I was very clear. My pine tree analogy related exclusively to the argument "the climate's changed before - so this time it's not down to us". If there was another point you were trying to make by referring to past climate changes you didn't say what it was, so I had to guess.

The climate is indeed affected by many factors, most of which are well understood. None of these factors explain the long term warming trend we're experiencing, except for anthropogenic greenhouse gases.

[docmabuse66]

That industrialization can't affect climate was not my statement (certainly a significant factor due to land-use changes).

CO2 as the primary cause? At this point your pine tree analogy comes into play: It creates the impression that what it needs to grow a tree is only one single factor. Sunlight, seasons, wind+rain, condition of soil,...doesn't play any role in your analogy. So your comparison fails as well as the simplistic idea of "more CO2=more temp.", due to the complexity of nature.