I have to chuckle at the battle going on with stick graphs this weekend. Choose your weapon, flat or vertical blade, real data, or proxy data with an arbitrary extension added by the special effects department.
First, Christoper Booker’s flat bladed tool, made of real data from the UK Met office:
Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/9919121/Look-at-the-graph-to-see-the-evidence-of-global-warming.html
Next we have Joe Romm’s vertical bladed tool, made from proxy data, with the “natural extension to the Marcott et al. graph” (according to Michael Tobis at planet 3.0) added, pulled out of some orifice and spliced on.
Source: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/03/08/1691411/bombshell-recent-warming-is-amazing-and-atypical-and-poised-to-destroy-stable-climate-that-made-civilization-possible/
Which one would you rather have, young Jedi?
@Andrew Harding that’s 0.018% (per centum).
“[ThinkProgress] is not only the most widely read climate science blog in the world, it is also the fastest growing in social media. We’re very much an expanding circle.” –Joe Romm
⸰ ∘⚬⚪ ੦ ⵔ ୦ 〇 ◯
No matter how much it expands, it’s still a big zero.
Not much new there, this kind of research was done long ago.
After Climategate, it was clear that Warmist claims would become more frequent, more hysterical, and more mendacious. There is nowhere else for them to go.
Eric at 1056. It’s a computer model projection….
Re: Bookers Graph
1) 30 years is the minimum acceptable period for which any assessment of temperature change can be made, aside from his use of the 1997 maximum as a starting point. This is not a quibble about his choice of period, it is a mathematical essential for any statistical interpretation.
2) The choice of axes on the graph as well for such a short period would make even a large temperature increase look flat.
To quote Daniel Kahneman…”An exaggerated faith in small samples is only one example of a more general illusion. We pay more attention to the content of messages than to information about their reliability, and as a result we end up with a view of the world around us that is simpler and more coherent than the data justifies. Jumping to conclusions is a safer sport in the world of out imagination than it is in reality.”…Thinking, Fast and Slow
Better to look at the most recent temperature reconstruction
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn23247/dn23247-1_1200.jpg
Jim Clarke says:
March 10, 2013 at 10:29 am
“Curious. What would you find pertinent and relevant?”
============================================
Not sure. Only sure that this graphs are sides of a silly coin.
I think developing a metric based on free energy would be relevant, but not able to state what that would be. And i admit even that would be pertinent only in its multidimensional changes. Has the ‘heat’ content of the globe changed? Temperature averages can be wildly misleading in such a large varied system with such interrelated constituent parts and phenomena.
The System is Broken: Incompetent Science and Insane Politics
That is the bottom line.
Romm’s posting of the Marcott paper (blue) even got the paper wrong. The abstract says temperatures are only 75% of the Holocene max. Thatbis not what the blue curve shows.
Figure 1b attempted to agree with Mann’s 2008 faulty hockey stick by using his Nature trick to splice on thermometer temps. Which then contradicted both the paper’s primary conclusion, and it’s unpaywalled abstract.
Marcott’s effort to be consistent with Mann’s faulty science only went to show that his proxies have faulty temperature calibrations. Which were expressly only lab determined, and not post hoc adjusted to what thermometer temps at the 73 sample sites are showing. Bad agreeing with bad does not make good. It makes double bad.
Global warming? Temperatures rising, making England into a sub-tropical paradise? I wish.
Sunday 10th March. No daffodils in bloom. Snowdrops just emerging. Just in time, too.
It’s now 2100hrs and it has started to snow. This is on the south coast of England where the climate (weather?) is supposed to be the balmiest.
I dare not comment further lest I transgress various laws pertaining to on-line obscenity and the policies of this most excellent blog.
When they have such incredible reconstructions and amazing projections at their disposal, I wonder why they limit themselves to a mere 8.25 degree F rise in temperature. Why not go for broke and claim 30 degrees before the whole party ends. These days there is only one place for CAGW to go and that is up.
Re: Romm’s graph
What does Romm predict the temperature “anomaly” to be in 4000 AD? Follow his “projection”, and it looks a lot like the seas are going to be boiling in about 3 weeks.
Mr. Romm is scaring us with these projections of his…
Looks to me like CO2 has allegedly saved us from an imminent ice age – Yippee !!!
Pamela: Grey water is what’s left from cleanup activities, such as dirty laundry. The metaphor doesn’t, um, wash. Unfortunately.
Presumably Romm didn’t get the memo.
If you make it look too catastrophic, you can’t indulge in industrial scale corruption on the pretext of being able to do something about it.
if it’s only 75% of the….
..then 25% ain’t
unless you add a tree ring proxy
Time for Climate Dundee: Thats not a hockeystick, this is a hockeystick.
Don’t know what to think about this headline
Rainforests may be more resilient than feared: study
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/rainforests-may-be-more-resilient-than-feared-study-20130311-2fuss.html
How did Romms tool get so bloody? You have to be careful swinging that around.
You may wish to look over at suyts place. He (and others) has just posted an excellent post debunking the latest hockey-stick nonsense resurrected by Marcott et al. 2012
http://suyts.wordpress.com/2013/03/10/the-hockey-stick-resurrected-by-marcott-et-al-2012/#comment-55684
Stephen Brown says:
March 10, 2013 at 1:14 pm
“Sunday 10th March. No daffodils in bloom.
I understand the point you’re making, but, there are daffodils beginning to bloom, I can go outside now and snap a photo of some covered in snow and ice, there are hardy varieties that are not effected too much by temperatures or snow and frost, they come-out earlier late winter-early spring. I have a good laugh when I hear alarmists use the same argument to make-believe that spring has come earlier.
Vince Wilkinson (@Archeobiognosis) says:
March 10, 2013 at 12:29 pm
Re: Bookers Graph
1) 30 years is the minimum acceptable period for which any assessment of temperature change can be made, aside from his use of the 1997 maximum as a starting point. This is not a quibble about his choice of period, it is a mathematical essential for any statistical interpretation.
2) The choice of axes on the graph as well for such a short period would make even a large temperature increase look flat.
To quote Daniel Kahneman…”An exaggerated faith in small samples is only one example of a more general illusion …….
Better to look at the most recent temperature reconstruction
=====================
The 30 year limitation is an arbitrary decision founded on nothing but supposition. 1997 wasn’t the maximum 1998 was. So, you’re right, yours isn’t a quibble. It’s just wrong. Even if you do use the most recent 30 years of temp data you still don’t get the nonsensical spike as your silly reconstruction shows.
As to the choices of axes, who exactly is the arbiter of that? I would submit the most common choices lend for an over-exaggeration of what is happening. The axes and scaling are done for emotive effect. Here is a graph which is scaled to human perceptibility. This is our global temps. http://suyts.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/how-the-earths-temperature-looks-on-a-mercury-thermometer/
As to Marcott’s reconstruction….. without the idiotic splicing, you can see it here….. http://suyts.wordpress.com/2013/03/10/the-hockey-stick-resurrected-by-marcott-et-al-2012/
Yes, let’s look at the last reconstruction, shall we?
Sorry for the horrid self promotion, but, I thought they were apt for the comment. 🙂
Grant Foster tries to accuse John Coleman of cherry picking :
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/cherry-picking-is-childs-play/
He replaces John’s straight line with a bendy one and explains : “Here, in red, is an analysis using all the data:”
Analyis? What analyis? What does the mysterious red line actually represent. What is this powerful new tool of science of which the name shall not be spoken?
I politely asked three times. The world never even got to see the question since Tammy simply binned my posts and refused to answer.
Must be that ‘Open Mind’ of his getting in the way again.
Now why would he wish to censor the question? Odd. Perhaps there’s something about the model he is fitting that does not bear the public scutiny.
Don’t forget Vince, that in the 1970s scientists were predicting a coming ice age. The whole scare about ‘Global Warming’ which followed in the 80s and 90s was based on just a few years of warming. Did you insist that 30 years was “a mathematical essential” then? But now the warming has stopped for the last 16 years and so 30 years suddenly becomes the minimum acceptable period?
Give me a break!
Joe Romm’s vertical bladed looks like a divining rod.