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’
Will NYT’s Justin Gillis & AP’s Seth Borenstein retract their original articles on now collapsed study?!
New Hockey Stick Study author Shaun Marcott is now officially the new Michael Mann!: [email protected]
Warmist Shaun Marcott’s media touted study now exposed: The ‘Hockey Stick that never was’: Prof. Pielke Jr.: NYT’s ‘Andrew Revkin updates his earlier posts to note the ‘lost blade’ from the Marcott-hockey-stick-that-never-was’ — Will media retract claims?! New Hockey Stick Study author Shaun Marcott is now officially the new Michael Mann!: [email protected]
UN IPCC Lead Author Richard Tol on new Hockey Stick scandal: ‘Truly irksome is the deviation between what the paper says and what their data say’ — New Hockey Stick Study author Shaun Marcott: [email protected]
Hockey stick authors: Did we mention that the last century of our hockey stick isn’t statistically robust? ‘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’
WIll AP & NYT Retract articles?! Bjorn Lomborg on New Hockey Stick collapse: ‘We were told’: ‘Over past 11,000 yrs, the last 100 were abruptly warming. Today, the researchers admit this was wrong’ — Will NYT’s Justin Gillis & AP’s Seth Borenstein retract their original articles on now collapsed study?!
New Hockey Stick Study author Shaun Marcott: [email protected]
Will AP & NYT Retract New Hockey Stick articles?! Prof. Roger Pielke Jr: ‘The reality of climate change, the importance of the cause or the evilness of the deniers — none of these excuse misrepresenting science’
Admission: NASA’s Gavin Schmidt acknowledges apples-oranges fakery in Marcott ‘new’ hokey stick — Via Junk Science: Insufficient data used as an excuse (again) for fakery. Gavin Schmidt acknowledges in a comment to RealClimate’s Marcott defense of teh the new hokey stick that there wasn’t enough paleo data to reconstruct 20th century temps — so Marcott grafted on the instrument record, instead of simply reporting the decline up to the 20th century. Makes you wonder: if had Marcott continued the paleo reconstruction through the 20th century, would the decline would still be occurring? If so, such a decline would obviously discredit the rest of the reconstruction’
‘More than 700 scientists from 400 institutions in 40 countries have contributed peer-reviewed papers providing evidence that the Medieval Warm Period was real, global, & warmer than the present’ — Climate Depot’s Medieval Warm Period Round Up of Studies
New Study claiming global temps highest in 4000 years, contradicted by previous studies — Media touted study based on ‘reconstructed data’ from only 73 data sites — Analysis: New study has ‘disappeared The Ice Age!’ — Study in Science ‘completely obliterated the entire paleo record’
Prominent Geologist Dr. Don Easterbrook: Validity of Marcott et al. new ‘Hockey Stick’ study PART II — The study’s ‘conclusion is wrong’ — ‘The Marcott et al. conclusion that “Global temperatures are warmer than at any time in at least 4,000 years” is clearly contrary to measured real-time data and thus fails the Feynman test, i.e., it is are wrong…Claim of ‘A heat spike like this has never happened before, at least not in the last 11,300 years’ is clearly contrary to measured real-time data and thus fails the Feynman test, i.e., their conclusion is wrong’
Geologist calls new warmist study ‘wrong’: ‘Temps during virtually all of period from 10,000 to 1,500 years ago were warmer thanpresent & 85% of past 10,000 years were warmer than present’ — Prominent Geologist Dr. Don Easterbrook: ‘In past 10,000 years, at least six other warm periods of magnitude equal to MWP occurred; 9 other warm periods that were 0.5°C warmer than MWP occurred; two warm periods that were 1°C warmer than MWP occurred; & three warm periods that were 1.5°C warmer than MWP occurred. All of these periods warmer than MWP clearly contradict the Marcott et al. conclusions’