John Hinderaker summarizes “the priority that the global warming alarmists give to politics and career advancement over science” The Alarmists Do “Science”: A Case Study
The story began when Steve McIntyre, the same researcher who was largely responsible for destroying Michael Mann’s “hockey stick” graph purporting to show unprecedented warming in the 20th century, turned his attention to a famous article published by Keith Briffa of East Anglia’s CRU in 2000. This article analyzed the diameters of tree rings, including rings from an area called Yamal in Siberia, and conveniently generated another hockey-stick shaped graph. You can read an account of the ensuing controversy here. McIntyre’s work appeared to show that Briffa had cherry-picked trees in order to get the result he was looking for. One fact that this story highlights is that global warming alarmists publish their results in scientific journals, but refuse to make the underlying data publicly available so that the validity of their analyses can be checked.
Bishop Hill also finds
McIntyre therefore prepared a revised dataset, replacing Briffa’s selected 12 cores with the 34 from Khadyta River. The revised chronology was simply staggering. The sharp uptick in the series at the end of the twentieth century had vanished, leaving a twentieth century apparently without a significant trend. The blade of the Yamal hockey stick, used in so many of those temperature reconstructions that the IPCC said validated Michael Mann’s work, was gone.
Take a look:
Good-bye, hockey stick.
Tim Blair looks at the reactions to this story, and also brings up an important point, that none of the computer simulations could reproduce correctly the behavior of even 20th-century rainfall.
How is the media reporting about how these scientists scammed us on climate change/global warming, The greatest scandal in modern science?
More at Memeorandum.