Global warming ruins hockey

[Skybird]

Has it? It has always been "confirmed" by the same campers, and objecitng data and models are actively being oppressed.


It seems you miss the main implication of all this. The perception and debate is highly biased and is being tuned.



The court certainly did not buy Mann's excuses why he refuses to release his raw data. But that would be what science does: rechecking claims, models, theories and data. since Mann has always refused to release his raw data, it cannot be rechecked: it cannot be confirmed or falsified. In other words: from a strictly methodological point of view, Mann's statements are just claims, nothing mre.



He would not be the first prominent scientist forging data or theories. There have been quite some highly prolific scandals of this kind in the history of science.



As I pointed out, there are very strong financial and economic interests in having only this wanted version of the narraiton told in public, and staying silent on what contradicts the "official" version. The IPCC in my eyes has lost any trustworthiness and credibility, there have eben more scandals about it and dubious figures at its helm than I have kept track of.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Has it?

Yes, here's a list of some of them:
http://environmentalforest.blogspot....-for-team.html

The court certainly did not buy Mann's excuses why he refuses to release his raw data. But that would be what science does: rechecking claims, models, theories and data. since Mann has always refused to release his raw data, it cannot be rechecked: it cannot be confirmed or falsified. In other words: from a strictly methodological point of view, Mann's statements are just claims, nothing mre.

Here's Mann's raw data, available for over a decade:
http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/pu...ch/MANNETAL98/

[Skybird]

I refer back to my first link.

[Catfish]

"The American Thinker"?

I'll spare me reading that.

[Rockstar]

I for one dont think for a moment the consensus science band wagon has absolute truth. As Dowly pointed out RAW data is there but it doesn't mean the way or what was collected and assembled was the correct or only way. Nobody here has a clue what the numbers mean anyway. For all I know it could be code for grandma's chocolate chip cookie recipe.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

As Dowly pointed out RAW data is there but it doesn't mean the way or what was collected and assembled was the correct or only way. Nobody here has a clue what the numbers mean anyway. For all I know it could be code for grandma's chocolate chip cookie recipe.

You're right, but Mann's paper isn't the only one. In the past 20 years there has been a number of papers that have found their own hockey sticks using their own data.


Mann's paper simply gets mentioned because it was among the first (or the first?) and so is the most popular of them.

[Rockstar]

The point was that even in 2004 not everyone agreed with Mann's data especially the methods he used to obtain the results he came up with.

Unfortunately, discussion of this plot has been so polluted by political and activist frenzy that it is hard to dig into it to reach the science. My earlier column was largely a plea to let science proceed unmolested. Unfortunately, the very importance of the issue has made careful science difficult to pursue

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/4...ing-bombshell/


You do remember Rene Blondlot and his discovery of N-Rays don't you? I kinda figured that, dont feel bad nobody else does either! Nor does anyone remember the 120 or so other scientists claiming to have reproduced his work. Scientists are human their desires for fortune and glory sometimes far outweigh common sense and objectivness. Just think how different it could have been for Blondlot? If only he had the internet and politicians to make use of his discovery for their political gain. He would have been famous.

Besides the defense lawyers, politicians, and activists. Who among those named scientists claiming to have reproduced Mann's work have stood up to defend Mann's position?