WUWT readers may remember when Bishop Hill wrote Caspar and the Jesus paper. It was a wonderful narrative of the complex subject of tree rings and Steve McIntyre’s quest with debunking the Mann MBH98 paper, which created the original hockey stick. Now Bishop Hill has done it again with another great narrative. – Anthony
September 29, 2009 ClimateThere is a great deal of excitement among climate sceptics over Steve McIntyre’s recent posting on Yamal. Several people have asked me to do a layman’s guide to the story in the manner of Caspar and the Jesus paper. Here it is.
The story of Michael Mann’s Hockey Stick reconstruction, its statistical bias and the influence of the bristlecone pines is well known. McIntyre’s research into the other reconstructions has received less publicity, however. The story of the Yamal chronology may change that.
The bristlecone pines that created the shape of the Hockey Stick graph are used in nearly every millennial temperature reconstruction around today, but there are also a handful of other tree ring series that are nearly as common and just as influential on the results. Back at the start of McIntyre’s research into the area of paleoclimate, one of the most significant of these was called Polar Urals, a chronology first published by Keith Briffa of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia. At the time, it was used in pretty much every temperature reconstruction around. In his paper, Briffa made the startling claim that the coldest year of the millennium was AD 1032, a statement that, if true, would have completely overturned the idea of the Medieval Warm Period. It is not hard to see why paleoclimatologists found the series so alluring.
Some of McIntyre’s research into Polar Urals deserves a story in its own right, but it is one that will have to wait for another day. We can pick up the narrative again in 2005, when McIntyre discovered that an update to the Polar Urals series had been collected in 1999. Through a contact he was able to obtain a copy of the revised series. Remarkably, in the update the eleventh century appeared to be much warmer than in the original – in fact it was higher even than the twentieth century. This must have been a severe blow to paleoclimatologists, a supposition that is borne out by what happened next, or rather what didn’t: the update to the Polar Urals was not published, it was not archived and it was almost never seen again.
Read the rest here at Bishop Hill’s blog, and be sure to leave a nice comment if you like his writing.
OT, I see it’s a toasty -84F in Vostok right now. Lows over the next few days near -100F. Sure glad humanity will have at least one land mass to migrate to when the rest of the planet starts cooking… 🙂
Also read an excellent analysis by Luboš Motl:
Especially his conclusions which are outright devastating.
http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/09/beaten-with-hockey-sticks-yamal-tree.html
Jimmy Haigh
said
“Being Scottish my favourite Star Trek quote is: “Ye cannae change the laws o’ physics!”
You obviously didn’t hear the whispered aside at the end….”unless you’re from the IPCC of course….”
tonyb
“There is a great deal of excitement among climate sceptics”
I agree that anti-AGW arguments are improving as a result of studies like that described in this post and others covered on WUWT.
And it is good to see that more scientists are speaking out which help invalidate claims of an overwhelming consensus that the issue is settled.
Still, sorry to rain on this parade and with additional apologies to Winston Churchill, this is not the end, this is not even the beginning of the end, if we are fortunate, this may, possibly, be the end of the beginning . . . .
Everyone is familiar with the saying, “I’ll believe it when I see it.”
There’s a less well known corollary, “If you don’t believe it, you can’t see it” which is where I believe the warmist thought leaders are today. With a film like “The Day After,” even a severe winter in the US Northeast would be, to them, more evidence of what they have now termed “Man Made Climate Change.”
Think of Gilda Radner and her famous Saturday Night Live character Emily Litella (here’s a classic http://www.hulu.com/watch/2364/saturday-night-live-weekend-update-emily-litella-on-violins-on-tv).
Remember, there are SO many people SO invested in the AGW crisis . . . .
Given the depth to which their stakes have been driven into the ground, we aren’t even close to being able to expect any of Al Gore, Barak Obama, Henry Waxman, Barbara Boxer, et al to offer their own “Never Mind.”
Anyway, that’s what I think.
wws (05:13:44) :
nick wrote: “the problem with our models, is like religion I think. we first devote huge emotional resources into erecting the edifice then we spend the rest of our time finding reasons/justifications to believe the models are correct. we make the assumptions which the models are meant to prove, first, then the model is created, or theory, or such, then the facts are sought to boost our faith in the edifice we have built., –like religion.”
That’s a good observation of human nature – and allow me to point out that this is the exact OPPOSITE of what Science done properly and honestly is all about! A true researcher following the Scientific Method first collects *all* of the data it is possible to collect; then looking at *all* the data he may venture a hypothesis that would explain something he’s seen.
So, wws, are we now at the point where we must say the unsayable about the modellers?
The silence from the team is deafening. He was of course right. There will be NO be no comment from RC on this. They simply cannot reply to it because in this case the implications of illegal activity are enormous and others may be involved?
REPLY: I don’t know that there is any “illegal” activity. But in scientific circles the hand selection of data and the withholding of data despite requests for replication is certainly unethical. – A
realclimate?
The pompous condescension is simply too overwhelming over there for the regulars to lower themselves into this fray.
I’ve read the threads and comments for along time at RC.
The more recent the more confident they are in their declarations and dismissal of any and all challenges.
Their ultra despising of skeptics and all things critiquing of AGW is a phenomenon which leaves them entirely unable to recognize or acknowledge any science outside of their tyranical design.
Only brutal force will dislodge their positions. Primarily their champions in public institutions must face consequences for their official malfeasance.
The rest will follow.
Our Media, supporting the opposite side of science:
http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2009/09/media-ecoevangelists
Oh, Come ON, people!
…it’s clear the trees are in the pay of the oil companies.
David Hoyle (01:58:11) :
I was getting more and more depressed as the runaway train heading to Copenhagensville was gathering momentum… then along comes this buffer… Hallelujah !!!
Actually it’s a tunnel and this is what the Yamal revelations are and it comin’ the other way: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/209/510252370_1d146ef809.jpg
Carl Sagan is rolling over in his grave.
It should be called the “Yamal Briffa Affair”. Maybe for the movie?
We should have a vote on what to call it, For History.
One might easily take the comment above with a very large dose of salt. Or even contempt. At one time I may have done so. ( reference to the Bilderbergers) I came to this website via a recommendation from the webmaster at the Dan Burisch website. Now I look at this blog every day without fail.
I am no scientist but pride myself in completely rational thinking which I aim for all the time. I have no time whatsoever for religion though we are all spirits in physical bodies which I accept fully. Enough of that.
Now having said all that, there would seem to be some deep attempts at a manipulation of the world which means, we people, via possibly the Bilderbergers, New World Order, and even the Illimuminati. Assuming these exist I also believe they are very foolish people and probably not very pleasant compared to the run of sane rational people. It may be they are as deluded as the people they actually think -erroneously- are deluded, ( ourselves) in other words, these groups may be actual victims of their own projections. A strange irony maybe…
It may be the focus on so called global warming is one more attempt to manipulate the rest of us and I am open to this being the case if proven .
Now, as far as climate goes, I was sympathetic to the global warming thesis, but after much reading and reflection, I believe like life itself, other complicating factors are at work and religiously blaming carbon dioxide and methane may be one method of exerting control, But, there are other factors, which may influence warming. Or cooling.
One is the shift towards the galactic centre, during 2012, which seems to be scientifically accepted. Am I right on this? Many believe we are entering a region of dust accretion around this point where we are exposed to the galactic centre as we circle round the milky way. Where the gravitational field exerts more pull on the surrounding matter. I believe all the planets in the solar system are warming up right now? Am I right? also, if we are entering a new part of the Milky Way where the naked gravitational centre then exerts its full influence on us, this must perturb the gravitational and magnetic field of the sun. Have calculations been done on this, do we know what happens when we enter the constellation of ophiucus? And did the Mayans know what they were talking about and what we are in for? Why are these not made public, does NOAA know about this for instance or NASA?
Global warming may be insignificant in a few years if we enter a vast gravitational field as the pundits keep saying we are doing.
If we are entering a region of perturbed/heightened gravity and cosmic rays and such has this been building up over time which may help account for global warming in part or even in its entirety?
Another point, statistics are taken over a very short period of time and we assume only those factors are to blame that are actually looked at in our models. Now assuming we incorporate some extra factors into our analysis, will these not influence our eventual conclusions ?
So, the more things we consider the better weighted our conclusion may be in terms if what is actually happening. I read clouds are being taken more seriously, as far as creating cooling conditions, and is the cosmic ray thesis really dead as proposed by the I think a Danish scientist?
If we are entering a more cloudy area of the galaxy this must impact not only on our own atmosphere but on the sun as well, are these things considered instead of blaming it all on carbon dioxide and methane? Surely it may be we have to offset global warming with global cooling and then see how the hockey stick graph performs then, instead of sticking to one rigid model based purely on warming.
Tthe Earth may have warmed up over the last 150 years, but what is to say it will not cool down, if the sun stays as quite as it is? Too much faith is placed in finely made models, but the only real ‘model’ we have is reality, how things are and we must thus be humble observers for a change.
The problem with our models, is like religion I think. we first devote huge emotional resources into first erecting the edifice then we spend the rest of our time finding reasons/justifications to believe the models are correct. We make the assumptions first which the models are meant to prove, then the model is created, or theory, or such, then the facts are sought to boost our faith in the edifice we have built., –like religion.
I have re written and extended comment this and hope it is easier to read, thank you for the constructive criticism, I will bear this in mind in future
Nick
“The silence at RealClimate is stunning!”
Where’s the media????
“Carl Sagan is rolling over in his grave.”
So are Orwell, Jefferson, Einstein, Washington, et al!
Documentation of the history of the conspiracy!
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national determination practiced in past centuries.” (David Rockefeller, speaking at the June 1991, Bilderberg meeting in Baden-Baden, Germany June 1991.)
http://www.ourrepubliconline.com/OurRepublic/Author/49
Off topic: The IEEE is at it again:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/blog/energy/renewables/energywise/those-natural-gas-image-ads
You can leave comments there if you so desire.
Unlike the eerie silence at RC
Tamino has weighed in, in the wimpiest way possible:
“As for Steve McIntyre’s latest: I’m really not that interested. He just doesn’t have the credibility to merit attention. I have way better things to do.”
He got out of his “2 box” dilemma vs. Lucia by gloriously announcing her banishment.
What a sad sack.
hunter (06:08:59) :
The really annoying aspect of this is that AGW was never alive in the first place.
We have wasted billions of dollars and countless hours of time, exploring nothing, accomplishing nothing, and doing nothing productive.
You may be looking at this with too jaundiced an eye. What has happened is the “little guys” – purveyors of hard nosed research and fact – have dismantled a quite impressive opinion machine. It has happened not only because a fearless group of truth seekers refused to back down, but because the alarmist machine refused to admit their underlying agenda. That agenda is not science-based.
One might recall the old grade school throwdown where the class bully insults the little guy, “Aw ya mudda wears army boots!” In this case, Mr. McIntyre has produced photos, charts and affidavits clearly demonstrating that his mother has never worn army boots. And that the accusation is pure hokum meant to intimidate individuals into serving the bully’s agenda.
On the South side of Boston guys react to this insult with, “Ha? Whadidya say ’bout my mutha???”
And oddly, science begins to regain its stature.
I’m sure they don’t care. They award the prize to, “the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses”. Obviously this involves to some extent the “spirit of the times” (Zeitgeist). “They” are elected by the Norwegian Parliament (strangely, given Nobel was a Swede!).
Critical Moves:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/09/libertarian-group-to-sue-administration-for-failing-to-disclose-global-warming-docs-.html
To see a world in a grain of sand, an eternity in a second and the future from a dozen trees?
Congratulations to Watts and McIntyre, without their dedication and dogged perseverence where would we be?
This is really a siren call to all of us to help the cause of truth and science in any way we possibly can, this is the time to act, when our grandchildren ask in years to come, ‘grandad/Grandma what did you do in the war against the alarmists?’
The question each of us must ask ourselves everyday is ‘what have I done to help the cause of truth?’
There is no middle ground, there are no spectators, you are either for truth and justice or you are not, lets make the choice?
Schellnhuber’s true objective for falsifying science: a personal CO2 budget for everyone:
http://climatedepot.com/a/2796/ALERT-German-Climate-Advisor-proposes-creation-of-a-CO2-budget-for-every-person-on-planet
I hate to be cynical but what difference will this make? Do we believe this is the straw that will break the mythical camel’s back?
My point is the hockey stick was already discredited — along with its creator. That still didn’t stop the warmistas and the fawning, lazy, media from showing the graphic and citing Mann.
Unlike the eerie silence at RC
Tamino has weighed in, in the wimpiest way possible:
“As for Steve McIntyre’s latest: I’m really not that interested. He just doesn’t have the credibility to merit attention. I have way better things to do.”
Like start looking for another area to conduct research?
This is a complete surrender by Tamino. The equivalent of covering your ears and singing , “LALALALALALALA”.