New Data Tampering Record : Disappearing The Ice Age!

Mann is getting some serious competition for paleo-fraud.

The 1990 IPCC report showed the period 5,000 years ago to be about 1.5C warmer than the present, and it was almost 3C cooler 11,000 years ago

ScreenHunter_399 Mar. 08 00.22

First IPCC report

But that wasn’t going to scare anyone, so the team came up with a new hockey stick, which disappears the end of the ice age.

ScreenHunter_396 Mar. 08 00.02

Warming fastest since dawn of civilization, study shows – Science

The next graph overlays the new hockey stick on top of the 1990 IPCC version. Note that they have completely obliterated the entire paleo record. Impressive work.

ScreenHunter_398 Mar. 08 00.16

It is trivial to demonstrate that this new hockey stick is complete, utter crap.

Sea level rose 40 metres from 10,000 to 8,000 years ago, indicating that a huge amount of ice melted – yet the new hockey stick shows no warming during that period.  All that excess ice 10,000 years ago would have kept temperatures way down, as was shown in the 1990 IPCC graph. Half of Canada was still covered with ice 10,000 years ago, yet the new hockey stick shows that temperatures had already reached the Holocene Maximum. Impossible and absurd.

Most of the ice sheet was still present 11,000 years ago, yet the new hockey stick shows that temperatures were only 0.2C cooler than 1970. That would have been impossible with all that ice, which would have greatly suppressed temperatures – as was shown in the 1990 IPCC report.

ScreenHunter_400 Mar. 08 00.32

File:Post-Glacial Sea Level.png – Global Warming Art

This overlay shows how the new hockey stick had already reached the Holocene Maximum, when almost half of the massive ice sheet was still in place.

ScreenHunter_408 Mar. 08 06.11

Antarctic ice cores also show that temperatures were about 4C colder 11,000 years ago.  The new hockey stick completely missed that, showing temperatures less than 1C cooler at that time.

ScreenHunter_401 Mar. 08 00.49

New Antarctic Ice Core Data

Until the ice sheet melted 6,000 years ago, it would have been impossible to reach the Holocene Maximum – yet the new graph shows the peak temperatures occurring starting 10,000 years ago. Perhaps the authors think that ice wasn’t cold and white at that time?

How does this kind of garbage make it through peer review? They have violated the most basic laws of physics.

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to New Data Tampering Record : Disappearing The Ice Age!

  1. John Silver says:

    “How does this kind of garbage make it through peer review? They have violated the most basic laws of physics.”

    I think you answered your own question, physics are old science.
    In post-normal science, it’s the feeling, man.

  2. Looks to me like the new study was indicating we were rapidly moving into a new ice age. But we were saved by CO2. To keep the chill away we better burn the lot. We’re talking precautionary principle here.

  3. Keitho says:

    If you read the article it is obvious that the “unprecedented warming” is yet to come. I suppose the hockey team have got the headline and over time this will be forgotten as the study is disproved. *sigh* it makes you want to upchuck.

  4. berniel says:

    Steven, I would advise against using that graph from IPCC 1st Assessment as any sort of yardstick for global mean temperature. It’s derivation from the evidence base is hardly something to get excited about. See here:
    http://enthusiasmscepticismscience.wordpress.com/global-temperature-graphs/#Global

  5. Tel says:

    Very simple process of selective application of low-pass filters. If you average something enough. it always looks flat. Then splice that to a data series containing high frequencies and voila — instant record breaker. I seem to remember WUWT and others have whacked this mole several times already.

  6. gator69 says:

    “How does this kind of garbage make it through peer review?”

    The peer of a crook, is a crook.

  7. Glacierman says:

    It gave them the narrative to sell AGW. It’s all about marketing.

  8. miked1947 says:

    What would you expect if the “Peer Reviewers” were also Garbage Collectors! GIGO is the driving principle behind CAGW!
    Proper Smoothing gives you ant answers you want to find!

  9. Lance says:

    IPCC Report 2013 coming soon to a threater near you…we must drum up the BS….

  10. cynic says:

    “How does this kind of garbage make it through peer review?”
    I guess it was reviewed by Mikey Mann

  11. bernie1815 says:

    Cynic:
    You raised an interesting question given that NYT and AP both cite MM in their write ups. I wonder who the reviewers actually were.

  12. Edward. says:

    BS, pure and very adulterated BS – figures do lie if you make ’em – lets see the bloody data sets and methods.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s