My name is Fred and I am a gay conservative living in Ottawa. This blog supports limited government, the right of the State of Israel to live in peace and security, and tries to expose the threat to us all from cultural relativism, post-modernism, and radical Islam. I am also the founder of the Free Thinking Film Society in Ottawa (

Saturday, December 05, 2009

The most influential tree in the world.....

An important Climategate story...
Although McIntyre's exposure of the "hockey stick" was upheld in 2006 by two expert panels commissioned by the US Congress, the small group of scientists at the top of the IPCC brushed this aside by pointing at a hugely influential series of graphs originating from the CRU, from Jones and Briffa. These appeared to confirm the rewriting of climate history in the "hockey stick", by using quite different tree ring data from Siberia. Briffa was put in charge of the key chapter of the IPCC's fourth report, in 2007, which dismissed all McIntyre's criticisms.

At the forefront of those who found suspicious the graphs based on tree rings from the Yamal peninsula in Siberia was McIntyre himself, not least because for years the CRU refused to disclose the data used to construct them. This breached a basic rule of scientific procedure. But last summer the Royal Society insisted on the rule being obeyed, and two months ago Briffa accordingly published on his website some of the data McIntyre had been after.

This was startling enough, as McIntyre demonstrated in an explosive series of posts on his Climate Audit blog, because it showed that the CRU studies were based on cherry-picking hundreds of Siberian samples only to leave those that showed the picture that was wanted. Other studies based on similar data had clearly shown the Medieval Warm Period as hotter than today. Indeed only the evidence from one tree, YADO61, seemed to show a "hockey stick" pattern, and it was this, in light of the extraordinary reverence given to the CRU's studies, which led McIntyre to dub it "the most influential tree in the world".

But more dramatic still has been the new evidence from the CRU's leaked documents, showing just how the evidence was finally rigged. The most quoted remark in those emails has been one from Prof Jones in 1999, reporting that he had used "Mike [Mann]'s Nature trick of adding in the real temps" to "Keith's" graph, in order to "hide the decline". Invariably this has been quoted out of context. Its true significance, we can now see, is that what they intended to hide was the awkward fact that, apart from that one tree, the Yamal data showed temperatures not having risen in the late 20th century but declining. What Jones suggested, emulating Mann's procedure for the "hockey stick" (originally published in Nature), was that tree-ring data after 1960 should be eliminated, and substituted – without explanation – with a line based on the quite different data of measured global temperatures, to convey that temperatures after 1960 had shot up.

A further devastating blow has now been dealt to the CRU graphs by an expert contributor to McIntyre's Climate Audit, known only as "Lucy Skywalker". She has cross-checked with the actual temperature records for that part of Siberia, showing that in the past 50 years temperatures have not risen at all. (For further details see the science blog Watts Up With That.)

In other words, what has become arguably the most influential set of evidence used to support the case that the world faces unprecedented global warming, developed, copied and promoted hundreds of times, has now been as definitively kicked into touch as was Mann's "hockey stick" before it. Yet it is on a blind acceptance of this kind of evidence that 16,500 politicians, officials, scientists and environmental activists will be gathering in Copenhagen to discuss measures which, if adopted, would require us all in the West to cut back on our carbon dioxide emissions by anything up to 80 per cent, utterly transforming the world economy.

Little of this extraordinary story been reported by the BBC or most of our mass-media, so possessed by groupthink that they are unable to see the mountain of evidence now staring them in the face. Not for nothing was Copenhagen the city in which Hans Andersen wrote his story about the Emperor whose people were brainwashed into believing that he was wearing a beautiful suit of clothes. But today there are a great many more than just one little boy ready to point out that this particular Emperor is wearing nothing at all.

I will only add two footnotes to this real-life new version of the old story. One is that, as we can see from the CRU's website, the largest single source of funding for all its projects has been the European Union, which at Copenhagen will be more insistent than anyone that the world should sign up to what amounts to the most costly economic suicide note in history.

The other is that the ugly, drum-like concrete building at the University of East Anglia which houses the CRU is named after its founder, the late Hubert Lamb, the doyen of historical climate experts. It was Professor Lamb whose most famous contribution to climatology was his documenting and naming of what he called the Medieval Warm Epoch, that glaring contradiction of modern global warming theory which his successors have devoted untold efforts to demolishing. If only they had looked at the evidence of those Siberian trees in the spirit of true science, they might have told us that all their efforts to show otherwise were in vain, and that their very much more distinguished predecessor was right after all.


Blogger ian said...

British archives contain more than 100,000 Royal Navy logbooks from around 1670 to 1850 alone,” said Dennis Wheeler, a geographer based at Sunderland University. “They are a stunning resource. Global warming is a reality, but our data shows climate science is complex. It is wrong to take particular events and link them to carbon dioxide emissions. These records will give us a much clearer picture of what is really happening.”

What they have found calls in to question modern-day thought. Wheeler has found accounts of an increasing number of storms over Britain in the late 17th century, occurring doing the Little Ice Age that hit Europe from approximately 1600 to 1850. Records also point to a warming in the 1730’s that must have been caused naturally.

7:00 PM  
Blogger Lucy said...

Logbooks over a space of 180 years will give a brief snapshot but how about ice cores that go back over 800,000 years which is what Climate scientists use. These tell of how natural changes take place over centuries and how the amount of CO2 in the atmopshere is higher now than at any point during those 800,000 years. Look at a graph of CO2 levels pre-industrial and CO2 levels post-industrial revolution. Mighty strong evidence that we put it there and in a much shorter time span than nature has done for almost the past millennia.

7:34 PM  
Anonymous Philanthropist said...

Data from 'Climate scientists' is completely irrelevant.

So-called 'climate scientists' manipulated the very basis of their data long before they ever published anything.

And these 'scientists' then bullied the Journals into not printing anything that questioned their righteousness.

'Climate scientist' truthiness stinks. Good bye guys.

9:23 PM  
Blogger Lucy said...

Data from climate scientists is irrelevant? I love the head-in-the-sand attitude because it just shows the only argument deniers can make is no argument. Makes it simple for us to marginalise you as inconsequential and say to other deniers, look what your side are adding to the debate, exactly nothing.

1:05 PM  
Anonymous Philanthropist said...

Dear Lucy: In case you haven't heard, the e-mail exchange between 'climate scientists' reveal that they deliberately skewed their data to favour their conclusions, and then they threw out the original data. It is 'your side' that brings less than nothing to the table because bad data is less than worthless. Remaining a 'true believer' now will make you look like a fool.

2:59 AM  
Blogger Lucy said...

Philantropist - So you just ignore the 2500 scientists and climate experts of the IPCC? Maybe they are all part of the conspiracy.
Hope you have your tin foil hat ready.

5:26 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home