PODCAST: Dr. Ross McKitrick on climate, hockey-sticks, and Mann

Dr. Ross McKitrick of the University of Guelph, Canada, is a professor of economics who got interested in the climate debate after looking over satellite data. He found the climate community very unresponsive and went on his own journey to discover what was up. 

He, alongside Steve McIntyre, challenged the famous Hockey Stick paper. Listen in to hear his analysis and why you ought not trust the fraud. Models have to be accurate in their reporting without adjustment by climate pushers.

Advertisements

44 thoughts on “PODCAST: Dr. Ross McKitrick on climate, hockey-sticks, and Mann

    • Australia PM advisor ?
      That was 2 PMs back and wasnt an ‘official’ but some volunteer business advisory group
      When they show a story from 2015 as ‘news’

    • Mark B

      You can delete everything in the link after the “?”

      That latter part is an identifier so they know the link was forwarded by you. After deleting it I always load it to see that it works. It always does.

  1. Thank you for a very informative exchange. Even children and teenagers like Greta Thunberg would be able to understand your presentation and be relieved that there is nothing to fear from Climate Change.

  2. Can we get a transcript?
    I am sure I am not the only one who does not have 40+ minutes to listen to a taped conversation.
    It is too hard to pay attention for that long for most of us anyway.
    I have movies I want to watch that I have not because it requires sitting and doing nothing else for that long.
    Just sayin”.

    • MODS: it would be greatly appreciated if the podcast allowed the speech to be speeded up; personally, I listen to podcasts at 1.5 X real time.

    • Another vote for a transcript. I’m 80 years old and my hearing is not what it once was. I have no particular problem following normal audio, but for complex material, I find that I can either understand the words or track their meaning. Doing both together is difficult. I think that I have always been that way. Aging ears that no longer pass high frequencies have just made it more obvious. And I think that I’m not alone. I suspect that audio may be a less than ideal medium for complex material.

      BTW. I think the interview was well done. The interviewer seemed to understand the issues, and the questions and responses were in a comprehensible order. My problem is with the medium, not the presentation.

      Aside from which, like most people, I can read much faster than people can talk.

  3. Off Topic, but if this is the Stephen McIntyre who comments regularly here at WUWT and mentioned in this podcast, Well Done!! You are helping to ferret out corruption at the highest levels in the U.S. government.

    Folks, this “Ukraine Whistleblower” event was a pre-planned event. As we begin to understand the general outline of how the Schiff Dossier was assembled, we are now starting to get into the specifics. First discovered by researcher Stephen McIntyre, there is now evidence surfacing showing the ICIG recently created an entirely new ‘whistleblower complaint form’
    http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/09/27/breaking-icig-whistleblower-form-recently-modified-to-permit-complaint-heard-from-others/

  4. I was motivated to become a sceptic by the attitudes towards those being sceptical in comments sections of stories, just before the Climategate emails were published.

    One funny example (although well on my way to being a sceptic) was a comment about the hockey stick that I made that got me a bucket load of scorn. I asked, not completely irreverently, how do you know that the uptick in tree growth wasn’t because a moose died next to the tree. Just got me a lot of ridicule so it was funny to hear you mention it (although the more likely deer was used as can example).

  5. We’re fighting religious wars. Sins of the climate priests are egregious, but congregations willing suspend disbelief. You hang on with a tenacious grip if you think you’re saving the world.

    The real victim is science: the good ole’ days of F=MA being enough to sort-of kind-of understand the world is gone forever. In the US, probably less than 5% of the adult population (<1% in rest of world) can understand the basic tools of modern science: statistics & differential equations.

    Climate priests know this, and, lacking basic intellectual honesty & ethics, run amok with bad data and incorrect methodologies.

    Reasoned explanation by reasonable & knowledgable people (say, Dr McKittrick or Dr Judith Curry) fall on deaf ears: most in the public audience have literally no idea how to evaluate what is being discussed, and a significant subset think they're about to die because some bartender/politician told them the world ends in 12 years.

    • most in the public audience have literally no idea how to evaluate what is being discussed

      Spot on. But it’s worse than that: they don’t even realise that they have no idea how to evaluate it or even that they need to be doing so. MSM still largely controls what the bulk of the population think and believe.

  6. Why climate science is not science is not because they get things wrong, it is that they cover up what they have wrong.

  7. I have to say, an early version of the hockey stick (I didn’t even know that was the name at the time) was the lie that alerted me, a cofounder of Friends of the Earth in the UK to climate fraud. The version I saw (just after the original Nature publication) had been extracted by a weather scientist from Aberystwyth University. It started in the Little Ice Age which I recognized as playing with the limits. The dropping of the tree ring data seemed another sleight of hand. The increasing spikiness and maxima & minima of the instrumentation data seemed obvious (to an engineer) to be an artefact of better instruments. (and as I now understand increasing denser temporal and geographic coverage).

    Since then the lies and deceptions and the failed forecasts have turned me around completely. I note that the Dutch Meteorological Office (people with skin in the game) place sea level rise as 3rd out of 4 factors in their concerns for dyke safety.

    A good article to unite sceptics.

  8. Anthony, thanks for the great “statistical crack” comment (around the 13 to 14 min mark).

    I don’t care who you are, that’s funny.

  9. The podcast is excellent. It does not cover any new ground but if you are familiar with most of the issues with the Hockey Stick and the tuning of computer models and the importance of climate sensitivity to increases in CO2- it provides a great summary and a resource to share with your less informed acquaintances.

    • Some folks can explain things with great clarity and concision and still not leave out important stuff. Those also tend to be senior scientists and engineers. The bafflegab comes from the posers.

      I’ve prepared a lot of learning materials and I’m amazed that Salman Khan of Khan Academy usually nails an explanation in about half the time I would take.

      If you have young folks in your life that need help with school, Kahn Academy is free and has lessons on almost every school subject.

      Anyway, for the reason outlined above, I suspect that Prof. McKittrick is a very good teacher based on the clarity of the podcast.

      • 100% agree. Very clear, very precise and he knows the critical points and does not get caught in the weeds.

  10. Excellent podcast. Just the past 48 hours I had occasion to share some of the high-level issues of the global warming debate with a friend who wanted to learn more. He hasn’t spent a lot of time with the topic, but has a PhD in physics and is familiar with statistical issues. I’ve passed this on and expect it will be very enlightening.

    Thank you to Ross and Stephen for the patient, careful, and thoughtful approach to these issues.

    The Hockey Stock, the bristlecone pines, the IPCC, oh my!

    Brings back lots of memories…

  11. I wish from the bottom of my heart – I could tease all this out for science students all around the world and anyone for that matter, interested in the truth versus politics in climate data, tricks and fraud etc etc

    thank you Ross and Anthony

  12. Just finished listening to the entire interview.
    Very good summary of the issues over that last 20 years. IMO Dr McKittrick describes in very reasonable format how the Hockey Team and the modellers are corrupting science and are leading the Western countries to disaster.

    Well done podcast Anthony. Kudos.

  13. Good pod cast. CO2 is beneficial. Period.

    Regarding dodging a bullet, let’s say we were heading to a new ice age, dont you think if OC2 caused 3 C of warming we might have been better off?

  14. Wasn’t it proven that Mann’s displayed & boasted a “Nobel Prize” & certificatetgat were proven a FRAUD & FORGERY in evidence in courts of law in law suit? YES! The Nobel Committee also verified & was shocked Mann had forged a Nobel Cetificate & was displaying it at his office. Was proven he is a liar, fraudster, & reprehensible con man. It it fully proven his hockey stick is manipulated fraud. It is time universities fire such frauds, as well as revolk the degrees, & PhDs of such proven frauds.

    • Just read the citation that accompanied OwlGore’s Nobel Prize. It awards the Prize ONLY to Owlgore. It lists numerous contributors, including Mann, and the IPCC, but NONE of them are considered RECIPIENTS of the Nobel Prize, and NONE of them ever claimed the Prize on their bio pages. The JANITOR who sweeps out Mann’s office at Penn State contributed a tiny bit, but HE doesn’t get to claim he is a Nobel Prize recipient, either.

      ‘Michael Mann has never been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize’
      Nobel Committee Rebukes Michael Mann for falsely claiming he was ‘awarded the Nobel Peace Prize’
      By Marc Morano –October 26, 2012
      https://canadafreepress.com/article/nobel-committee-rebukes-michael-mann-for-falsely-claiming-he-was-awarded-th

      Nobel Committee Rebukes Michael Mann for falsely claiming he was ‘awarded the Nobel Peace Prize‘…. Not a UN ‘certificate’– Mann was one of a ‘select group’ of a mere 2,000 people to receive a ‘commemorative certificate of involvement’ — not from the Nobel committee, but from the UN’s Dr Rajendra Pachauri.

      Oh, and BTW, Rajendra Kumar Pachauri was the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. He held the post from 2002 until his resignation in February 2015, due to sexual harassment allegations.

      ‘Michael Mann has never been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize’
      Nobel Committee Rebukes Michael Mann for falsely claiming he was ‘awarded the Nobel Peace Prize’
      https://canadafreepress.com/article/nobel-committee-rebukes-michael-mann-for-falsely-claiming-he-was-awarded-th
      By Marc Morano —— Bio and Archives–October 26, 2012

  15. Back in the days before ClimateGate there were two names mentioned that were real “thorns in their sides”. McIntyre and McKittrick.
    I think that McKittrick’s contributions have been underappreciated.
    Thank you both, and thank you Ross.

Comments are closed.