IPCC AR6 is worse than you thought – with that?

Guest contribution by Eric Worrall

Steve McIntyre is back, analyzing questionable climate science. If you thought Michael Mann’s original climate hockey stick, with its intriguing obvious use of upside down proxies and apparent data erasures, was interesting, take a look at McIntyre’s in-depth look at the product of an entire team of climate scientists who think like Mann.

The IPCC AR6 hockey stick

Although climate scientists keep saying that mistakes in their proxy reconstructions of the “hockey stick” don’t matter – that it doesn’t matter if they turn data upside down, that it doesn’t matter whether they pick individual series, depending on whether they Going into the 20 such errors don’t matter, because the hockey stick itself doesn’t matter – the IPCC remains addicted to hockey sticks: lo and behold, Figure 1a of its newly created summary for policy makers contains something else – a hockey stick diagram. If you thought Michael Mann’s hockey stick was bad, imagine a bright hockey stick made by awakened climate scientists. As climate researchers say, it’s even worse than we thought.

It’s hard to know where to start.

The idea / definition of a temperature “proxy” is that it has some kind of linear or near-linear relationship to temperature, with the errors being white noise or low order red noise. In other words, if you were to look at a panel of actual temperature “proxies” you would expect series to look pretty similar and consistent.

But you don’t see that in the data used by the IPCC. One would never know from the IPCC report, or even from the articles cited, as the authors of these one and two millennia temperature reconstructions meticulously avoid recording the underlying data. Given the misprecision of the IPCC chart, it is difficult for readers unfamiliar with the subject to fully understand the extreme inconsistency of the underlying “proxy” data.

Read more: https://climateaudit.org/2021/08/11/the-ipcc-ar6-hockeystick/

There’s a lot more where this comes from, it’s worth a few minutes to read.

One of the most intriguing finds is interpreted by McIntyre as a new attempt to “hide the decline,” though he has serious concerns about the entire reconstruction that has been cut up. Read his full article to delve into the details of this latest episode of alarmist data torture.

What can I say, as long as we pay them, they will keep producing.


Item rating

Like this:

Like Loading…

Comments are closed.