This is hilarious, I finally got a retraction out of Dr. Michael Mann.

The AGW proponents must be reeling from McIntyre’s takedown of Marcott et al, because I watched the most hilarious smear genesis unfold this morning a few minutes after a note about McIntyre’s analysis was sent to Joe Romm of Climate Progress.

First, I sent this note to Romm this morning at 6:40AM PST. It was a little good-natured ribbing over Romm’s extrapolation of the Marcott hockey stick (in red):

I sent a one line note with a link to McIntyre’s latest:

I got his back almost immediately from Romm at 6:45AM PST:

Now you are denying the instrumental record, too?

This made me laugh, because neither Romm’s graph, nor Marcott’s, has the instrumental record in it, only Marcott’s reconstructed temperature and Romm’s red line “projected” add on. Plus, as McIntyre points out, Marcott et al did NOT splice on the instrumental record:

I have consistently discouraged speculation that the Marcott uptick arose from splicing Mannian data or temperature data. I trust that the above demonstration showing a Marcottian uptick merely using proxy data will put an end to such speculation.

Ten minutes later, at 6:55AM PST, this appeared on Dr. Mann’s Twitter feed:

Wait, what?

Coincidence? Maybe, but I don’t think so. Note Mann says “News Alert” and “now denying”, which implies immediacy. Of course since I am blocked by Mann on Twitter (as are dozens if not hundreds of people), I’m not allowed to post a response, so I have to do it here.

For the record, I don’t “deny” the instrumental record, but I do study it intently. For example, via this peer reviewed paper published in JGR Atmospheres of which I am a co-author:

Fall, S., Watts, A., Nielsen‐Gammon, J. Jones, E. Niyogi, D. Christy, J. and Pielke, R.A. Sr., 2011, Analysis of the impacts of station exposure on the U.S. Historical Climatology Network temperatures and temperature trends, Journal of Geophysical Research, 116, D14120, doi:10.1029/2010JD015146, 2011

Certainly it has gotten warmer in the last 100 years.

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1912/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1912/trend

It also hasn’t warmed significantly in the past 15+ years, much like that period post 1945 to the late 1970s in the graph above:

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1997/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1997/trend

My view of the instrumental record is that it is clearly showing some warming, but as I point out many times, some of that warming trend is due to siting biases and adjustments.

Following the initial conversation, over the space of an hour, while starting to write this post, I communicated in several emails to Romm how his characterization of my “denial” of the surface temperature record was wrong, and how the Marcott et al graph he posted on Climate Progress had no instrumental record in it at all, only proxy data and projection:

And, “somehow” this must have been communicated to Dr. Mann, (and If Joe Romm sent my email along, I thank him) because up until this blog post there has been no public discussion here of my supposed “denial of the instrumental record”. Shortly after my last email to Romm at 8:35AM, Dr. Michael Mann, to his credit, tweeted this rare retraction at 8:58AM PST, though he just couldn’t resist getting another jab in:

Watching the reverse denial now of Marcott et al failings, I think we have entered the era of climate satire.

Share this: Print

Email

Twitter

Facebook

Pinterest

LinkedIn

Reddit



Like this: Like Loading...