Global Warming Bombshell

Technology Review ^ | October 15, 2004 | Richard Muller

[Exton1]

Global Warming Bombshell

A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics. ..... Canadian scientists Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick have uncovered a fundamental mathematical flaw in the computer program that was used to produce the hockey stick. In his original publications of the stick, Mann purported to use a standard method known as principal component analysis, or PCA, to find the dominant features in a set of more than 70 different climate records.

[Exton1]

Or "Junk in, Junk out"

[angkor]

Technology Review ^ | October 15, 2004

???????????????

[globalheater]

From the same Article.
Quote:

If you are concerned about global warming (as I am) and think that human-created carbon dioxide may contribute (as I do), then you still should agree that we are much better off having broken the hockey stick. Misinformation can do real harm, because it distorts predictions. Suppose, for example, that future measurements in the years 2005-2015 show a clear and distinct global cooling trend. (It could happen.) If we mistakenly took the hockey stick seriously--that is, if we believed that natural fluctuations in climate are small--then we might conclude (mistakenly) that the cooling could not be just a random fluctuation on top of a long-term warming trend, since according to the hockey stick, such fluctuations are negligible. And that might lead in turn to the mistaken conclusion that global warming predictions are a lot of hooey. If, on the other hand, we reject the hockey stick, and recognize that natural fluctuations can be large, then we will not be misled by a few years of random cooling.

A phony hockey stick is more dangerous than a broken one--if we know it is broken. It is our responsibility as scientists to look at the data in an unbiased way, and draw whatever conclusions follow. When we discover a mistake, we admit it, learn from it, and perhaps discover once again the value of caution.

Quote end.

[6SJ7]

Mann purported to use a standard method known as principal component analysis, or PCA...

Looks more like he used a method called TBS, or total bull ****.

[shekkian]

Hockey Sticks defeat Global Warming

[wotan]

Or "Junk in, Junk out"

NO! This is not a case of junk in, junk out. The problem is not in the data, but in the deficient understanding of those who wrote the computer program. I saw no indications of errors in the data, just in how that data was processed.

[Fresh Wind]

OK, so the math was wrong. They got the results they wanted, so what's the problem? Maybe Dan Ra^ther knows?

[Robert A Cook PE]

This will, of course, get immediate review and acceptance by the UN.

And the democrats.

[AlexW]

This is old news, and was talked about quite a lot here on FR.
Anyway, it is nice to remind people.

[Robert A Cook PE]

OK, so the math was wrong. They got the results they wanted, so what's the problem?

And THAT is the fundamental flaw in the global-warming-caused-by-United-States-economic-activity argument.

These liberals/socialists/UN "scientists" WANT is one result (US is responsible and must be taxed).

What they NEED (and are getting!) is a messy hodge-podge of contradictory and incomplete results.

But they WANT one result.

As scientists, they MUST look for facts and real theories, NOT THE RESULTS THEY WANT.

[N2Gems]

ping

[TYVets]

ping

[thackney]

BTTT

[B.Bumbleberry]

This article made a splash, but since has not had any noticeable impact on the GW debate. I think that is because most of the strident adherents to the GW cause approach it from an emotional level--almost like a religious conviction. Science has little to do with it now.

[DustyMoment]

Or "Junk in, Junk out"

I concur with wotan. The data was not junk, the reliance on computer analysis to provide "irrefutable" results is the error. Computer programs are only as good as the people who write them and what this article exposes is the fact that the computer program contained a serious flaw that yielded erroneous results.

It is those flawed results that have fueled the enviro-wackos' arguments for years. Dr. Sallie Baliunas has long complained that the computer models showing deleterious and huge temperature increases due to "greenhouse gases" have been flawed and yielded exaggerated effects not support by real-time data. This article supports her criticism of the computer models in addition to kicking the legs out from under the enviro-wackos arguments.

[A message]

ping

[dirtboy]

mark for later

[mo]

I wonder how much money this fraudulent hockey stick was able to sucker out of people?.....

[hobson]

ping!

[The Raven]

That hockey stick articles was out for a while......and some commentary:

WSJ editorial

Original post

More from NR