Links tagged “marcott”
- ‘How the (New) Hockey Stick Crumbled — A Post-Mortem’ — ‘This appears to be one more in a long series of frauds and hoaxes perpetrated by climate alarmists’
- ‘Lies, damned lies and hockey sticks’: ‘The exposure of yet another dodgy piece of climate-change alarmism shows the need for serious skepticism’
- Watch Now: Climate Depot’s Morano on Canadian TV on a cold spring & on The Hockey Stick that never was
- Climate Audit’s Steve McIntyre: ‘April Fools’ Day for Marcott et al’
- ROSS MCKITRICK RIPS THE HOCKEY STICK THAT NEVER WAS: ‘WE’RE NOT SCREWED’ — Study authors ‘quietly admitted their stunning claim about the 20th century ‘hockey stick’ is groundless’
McKitrick: 'In a private email to McIntyre, Marcott made a surprising statement. In the paper, they had reported doing an alternate analysis of their proxy data that yielded a much smaller 20th-century uptick, but they said the difference was “probably not robust,” which implied that the uptick was insensitive to changes in methodology, and was therefore reliable. But in his email to McIntyre, Marcott said the reconstruction itself is not robust in the 20th century: a very different thing. When this became public, the Marcott team promised to clear matters up with an online FAQ.
It finally appeared over the weekend, and contains a remarkable admission: “[The] 20th-century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions.”
Now you tell us! The 20th-century uptick was the focus of worldwide media attention, during which the authors made very strong claims about the implications of their findings regarding 20th-century warming. Yet at no point did they mention the fact that the 20th century portion of their proxy reconstruction is garbage'
- Marcott’s Hockey Stick Mystery: Why Was It Missing In His PhD Thesis? ‘It seems sharp uptick wasn’t in the thesis paper Marcott defended for his PhD, but is in paper submitted to Science’
Marcott's thesis has a series of diagrams in an identical style as the Science article. The proxy datasets are identical...the diagrams in the thesis lack the closing uptick of the Science' -- In addition to difference in closing uptick, important reconstruction versions were at negative values in the closing portion of the thesis graphic, while they were at positive values in the closing portion of the Science graphic'
- Ross McKitrick demolishes Marcott hokey stick: 11,000-year study’s 20th-century claim is groundless
'The trouble is, as they quietly admitted over the weekend, their new and stunning claim is groundless. The real story is only just emerging, and it isn’t pretty'
- Robert Rohde, the chief data analyst behind the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project: ‘…we can’t use the analysis of Marcott et al. to draw any firm conclusions about how unique the rapid changes of the twentieth century are compared to the previous 10,000 years’
- Oops. The Hockey Stick That Never Was: Authors admit: ‘The 20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes’
Prof. Pielke Jr. rips Marcott's Hockey Stick study claims: 'What that means is that this paper actually has nothing to do with a 'hockey stick' as it does not have the ability to reproduce 20th century temperatures in a manner that is 'statistically robust.' The new 'hockey stick' is no such thing as Marcott et al. has no blade'
- Climate Depot Round Up of Marcott’s Collapsed New Hockey Stick Study — Prof. Pielke Jr. Mocks As The ‘Hockey Stick that never was’
New Climate Scandal Exposed: Will AP & NYT Retract Articles?! ‘Gross misrepresentation of the findings’ of New Hockey Stick Paper – Claimed Hottest temps in 4000 years! Now accused of ‘skirting awfully close to crossing the line into research misconduct’
