The latest propaganda stunt from the Skeptical Science Kidz is underway and it is about as exciting as it is predictable. Every hour, a new opinion is revealed along with a cartoon climate scientist caricature drawn by former cartoonist turned “climate expert” John Cook. Our resident cartoonist, Josh, has different ideas on that. The first cartoon character of the “97 hours of consensus” was Mike Mann, who seems to think that “recent warming does appear to be unprecedented as far back as we can go”.
Right.
Apparently Dr. Mann on has limited time travel research skills, like this from his Penn State colleague, Dr. Richard Alley:
================================================================
Update: Some people (the usual suspect) objected to the graph above, for them there’s Loehl 2007 figure 2 below. Still no hockey stick, still no unprecedented temperatures. Even Mann had previously said that “I always thought it was somewhat misplaced to make it a central icon of the climate change debate,” which you can read about here. So, why does he continue to push it?
![loehle_fig2[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/loehle_fig21.jpg?quality=83)
(note: Dr. Craig Loehle writes via email that in a 2008 paper, he has updated the graph above to include new and more accurate data. His figure 2 for his 2008 paper: http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/AGW/Loehle/
Color Version of Figure 2 with reconstruction, CI’s
Data for this graph is online at http://www.econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/AGW/ )
Don’t like that? How about some graphs from NOAA/NCDC?
![petit150[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/petit1501.jpg?quality=83)
Source: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/paleobefore.html So we are still not seeing “unprecedented” temperature.
Or this one, before global warming became politicized:
Also, commenter mikeishere replotted the Greenland GISP2 ice core data to eliminate the objections over “x axis” compressions and provides this:
![greenlandicecore[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/greenlandicecore1.gif)
The answer is still the same, no unprecedented temperatures in the present as Mann claims.
================================================================
Then there’s the one from Dr. Kenneth Trenberth:
“all weather is now connected to climate change” – Yikes, every cloud is hiding a climate change boogie man now? Even the IPCC doesn’t believe this sort of fear mongering.
I had to chuckle though, because the SkS kids went to all this trouble to make this page where when you mouse over one of the cartoon character climate scientists, their arm goes up in the air to say “hey, I’m part of the consensus!”. That sort of high salute reminds me of the Nazi dress up photos we found last year on the Skeptical Science website. I suppose the SkS kidz didn’t see the connection to that incident, otherwise we wouldn’t have the cartoon climate scientists doing “consensus salutes” at the command of their cartoon creator. I’m pretty sure my Internet stalker Miriam O’Brien aka “Sou Bundanga” at Hotwhopper is having another hilarious conniption fit right now over that inconvenient linkage, even though it is funny to see all these cartoon climate scientists doing the “consensus salute” when you poke them with the mouse pointer.
Unfortunately, that’s about as entertaining as this propaganda stunt gets, though some of the opinions yet to be revealed from the cartoon climate scientists might be pretty funny. We’ll see.
So, we get 97 hours of these cartoon climate scientists and their opinions.
Josh seems to think we’ve heard it all before.
Don’t you mean as boring as it is predictable?
Anthony, so do school kids remind you of Nazis? They put their hands up too!
Trenberth ‘missing heat ‘ is a result of poor science not of good theory.
For if temperatures had increased in the way they said they would, STELLED SCIENCE, with increases in CO2 , then there would be no need for any ‘missing heat ‘ in the first place . The fact he cannot justify or even remotely prove his ‘missing heat’ idea is the reason why he tried to reverse the null hypothesise in the first place. And approach which results in a total fail for any undergraduate handing in an essay, would seem to be an acceptable standard with climate ‘science’ professionals . And they wonder why they consider a joke.
Skeptical Science website – 97% waste of time 100% of the time.
Help me understand the RH scale on the graph…
2 thoughts.
#1 – Trenberth’s statement is not surprising. He has been trying to change the Null Hypothesis for years now. And that is essentially what he is trying to do with his statement there. He cloaks it in sciency lingo, but the essence is that he is losing the debate and is trying to change the rules in the middle.
#2 – Cook’s fascination with Nazism reminds me of the Star Trek Episode where some ‘well meaning’ idiot had changed a society to resemble early to mid 20th century Germany (because it was efficient and it worked). Of course the result was the same (it was Roddenberry after all). Cook seems to think that Nazism is the salvation of the planet as well. It is not a new idea. Nor will it be the last time it is trotted out.
Heil, mein Klimate. Mein Klimate all heil.
This is too feeble to even bother trying to counter it.
Don’t flatter thier sorry efforts by reading and commenting on them.
@ur momisugly Oatley: September 8, 2014 at 4:05 am
“Help me understand the RH scale on the graph…”
—————-
Me thinks said “scale” is the Oxygen 18/16 variability.
See this “link” for a more detailed graph of said.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2010/04/cooling-of-greenland-over-past-8000.html
Reblogged this on gottadobetterthanthis and commented:
I love the ice core graphic. It is the best science available on all the available evidence. Evidence, not models, not conjecture.
The Autumn offensive from Obersturmbannführer Cook and the SS. Deploy the humour weapon!
Pointman
This baffles me. It might increase the number of hits on their website and entertain the true believers but I can’t see that it would achieve anything else.
This is too sad and says more than enough.
From Michael Mann’s narcissistic Facebook page:
“Here’s the Skeptical Science caricature of me, kicking off the “97 Hours of Consensus” project!”
(Emphasis added.)
Is there a way to combine Cook’s work as a screen saver? I can think of all kinds of ways to enjoy that stunt aka Barney Carnage. Mods, snip if I’ve gone over the top, past playing nice, gone to the dark side, been invaded by evil, and have totally gone mad. But oh I wish for my little Mac SE and a bit of the Barney on my screen.
http://mariedoucette.blogspot.com/2011/11/tech-angst.html
“Help me understand the RH scale on the graph…”
Oatley should be more concerned about the time axis. It is NOT years before 2000, the original paper uses BP in the standard paleo- definition, which is years before 1950. hence the graph ends in 1855, long before AGW could be measurable. Temperatures have climbed approx 1.4C at the ice core site since the plot ended.
You might want also to google what Alley said about using the GISP2 data for this purpose – its on the Dot Earth site.
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/08/richard-alley-on-old-ice-climate-and-co2/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
A website interested in the facts would check that I am right, apologise for misleading readers and issue a correction.
not to mention that if these 97 hours are intended to be representative of total hours of the climates existence I’d say their closer to .0000000000000000097 consensus.
There’s a curious leather clad case in lost luggage labelled Temporal Fuckwit PhD. The contents include a tin of gravy granules, a model railway set and a pile of grant application forms. There’s also a broken ruler and a mug emblazoned with the words Keep Calm and Embrace Chaos.
Bayesian priors have suggested the owner lives on Mars as befits their religious belief. But the model railway consists of rolling stock in green and a simple loop without buffers while the mug has no smell of coffee.
I’ve noticed that activist organization Polar Bears International is encouraging their supporters to follow the “97-hours consensus” campaign
From the PBI “news” department:
“Did you know 97% of climate scientists have concluded that humans are causing global warming? When was the last time 97% of scientists agreed on anything?
What’s scary is that less than 10% of Americans are aware of the 97% agreement among climate scientists.
This disparity has real consequences, with a number of scientific studies finding that when the public isn’t aware of the scientific consensus on global warming, they’re less likely to support action to mitigate climate change.
A social media campaign starts today with the aim of closing the “consensus gap.”
The 97 Hours of Consensus campaign will feature statements and hand-drawn caricatures from 97 scientific experts researching climate change or the impacts of climate change. The campaign begins on 9/7 (the date itself reinforcing the 97% consensus). Each hour, a statement and hand-drawn caricature of a scientist whose area of expertise involves climate change or the impacts of climate change will be published and shared on social media.
The quotes and caricatures will be published here.
Follow the twitter feed @skepticscience.”
http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/news-room/news/97-hours-consensus-campaign-starts-today
Looking back at history, think of everything that was widely believed to be true in the past. How much of it has actually turned out to be true? Isn’t consensus pretty much a guarantee that the belief is wrong?
We of course laugh at silly beliefs people had in the past, and like to believe that we could never be so stupid. Yet we forget that we are the descendants on those same silly people, and we have inherited their weaknesses along with their strengths.
The bigger question to be asked is this. Of all the consensus beliefs held by humanity over the ages, how many actually turned out to be true? You can’t escape death and taxes is the only one that comes to mind.
OT nit pick (mostly…) – Can someone tell me why people who generate charts seem have a proclivity for using weird scaling factors for presentation? Take the above GISP2 chart (I truly don’t know who made it?) http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/gisp2-ice-core-temperatures.jpg for example –
Why the weird values on the X axis scale? On top of that the intervals between the dates are not consistent. The first is obviously 95 years , (the ice pack time I suppose?) and the last is 436 years so time is being generally being compressed the further you go back.
Not sticking with some semblance of cardinal numbering hides the time compression and, IMO, hiding anything can only raise suspicion as to the reason for doing it.
Here’s the original data as best I can find – ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/greenland/summit/gisp2/isotopes/gisp2_temp_accum_alley2000.txt
I generated a chart from that data in Excel with what I think is a start to an acceptable format for the X axis and no time compression/variation. http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y48/mikeishere/greenlandicecore.gif
Greg Laden reckons it’s marvellous…
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/26/global-hurricane-activity-at-historical-record-lows-new-paper/
It appears Trenberth may be a AGW propagandist first and a scientist second. It is interesting that the IPCC would select Trenberth as their lead author for the section on “Extreme Weather” in their climate assessment report. It sounds as if the author selection for the IPCC climate assessment reports is rigged to produce a report to support a political agenda rather than to provide an unbiased, accurate, assessment of the ‘science’ of climate ‘change’ and any observed changes or no changes in planetary temperature.
http://www.climatechangefacts.info/ClimateChangeDocuments/LandseaResignationLetterFromIPCC.htm
After some prolonged deliberation, I have decided to withdraw from participating in the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). I am withdrawing because I have come to view the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant as having become politicized. In addition, when I have raised my concerns to the IPCC leadership, their response was simply to dismiss my concerns….
Shortly after Dr. Trenberth requested that I draft the Atlantic hurricane section for the AR4’s Observations chapter, Dr. Trenberth participated in a press conference organized by scientists at Harvard on the topic “Experts to warn global warming likely to continue spurring more outbreaks of intense hurricane activity” along with other media interviews on the topic. The result of this media interaction was widespread coverage that directly connected the very busy 2004 Atlantic hurricane season as being caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gas warming occurring today. Listening to and reading transcripts of this press conference and media interviews, it is apparent that Dr. Trenberth was being accurately quoted and summarized in such statements and was not being misrepresented in the media. These media sessions have potential to result in a widespread perception that global warming has made recent hurricane activity much more severe.
Moreover, the evidence is quite strong and supported by the most recent credible studies that any impact in the future from global warming upon hurricane will likely be quite small. The latest results from the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (Knutson and Tuleya, Journal of Climate, 2004) suggest that by around 2080, hurricanes may have winds and rainfall about 5% more intense than today. It has been proposed that even this tiny change may be an exaggeration as to what may happen by the end of the 21st Century (Michaels, Knappenberger, and Landsea, Journal of Climate, 2005, submitted).
3 week early freeze coming this week to the northern central US. It is just WX of course. But still, with colder than normal, the public just won’t buy into the global warming scare. Nature will undo in one winter what a thousands alarmist scare claimaints are attempting.
Unfortunately for Mr. Mann, every time he re-does his shtick, he’s forced to acknowledge some criticisms, and has to shorten his “as far back as we can go”. He still tries to get away with bogus proxies, but his “stick” has become less and less unprecedented each time.