Well, Myles Allen gave a presentation which demonstrated his ignorance about the issues of Climate Gate, Hide the Decline, and our dendro sticks in general. He further antagonizes people with his write up at Bishop Hill. He’s essentially stating that these issues aren’t relevant and wasting our time when we could be talking about important stuffs.
My fear is that by keeping the public focused on irrelevancies, you are excluding them from the discussion of what we should do about climate change should the decade-to-decade global warming trend observed since the 1970s continue and turn out, as current evidence suggests, to be largely caused by the increase in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.
Alarmists have to take this tactic. I’ll run down just a brief incomplete history. The hockey stick was a prominent and powerful visual cue to make people believe in CAGW. As Steve McIntyre writes, “……it was presented to the public, at least in Canada, not as an incidental argument, but as one of the major arguments, particularly for action right that instant.”
Well, it wasn’t just Canada. It was seen on the news, in text books and prominently displayed by the IPCC. When McIntyre got involved with this, the hockey sticks were very relevant to the alarmist argument. Recall that it eliminated the MWP and LIA, which countered the argument of natural variability. And, the hockey wars commenced. McIntyre and friends would show the hockey sticks, which ever iteration, to be of shabby statistical work. Much of the alarmist community vigorously defended not only the hs, but, also the people who created them.
Even before Climate Gate, the alarmist advocates were moving away from the importance of the hockey-stick as a poster image of why we need to take action. They were taking hits in too many other places to sustain this one part. But, that didn’t stop them from proclaiming McIntyre enemy number one. They were very spiteful, to say the least. Then Climate Gate explodes. McIntyre was vindicated. It didn’t just show that the dendrophrenology was based on shabby science, it showed that the people creating and supporting the hockey sticks knew this. It also demonstrated that they resorted to “tricks” to present the image they needed. It showed some awful personal behavior and their ethics were in high question, and still are.
Alarmists are quick to point out that they don’t need the hockey-stick for they CAGW hypothesis. And, in part, this is true. And, the skeptical community has shot so many holes in the dendro quasi-science that stick is only held together by a bandage called “belief“. So, is Climate Gate, hockey-sticks, and dendro important? Or, is it irrelevant as Myles Allen suggests?
Here’s why it is important. The scores of scientists who supported, approved, avowed, and produced these hockey-sticks, from our friends at RealClimate to the CRU in England, are seen has having supported a faux science. They were all, either so incompetent as to not check the veracity of the work(in spite of many stating it wasn’t valid) or, they knew this work was fallacious and pushed it on the public anyway.
Either way you look at it, there is no credibility in their statements; not Mann’s, not Briffa’s not Schmidt’s, not Jones’, none of them have a shred of credibility. Not just the ones who did the dendro, but the people who supported them, as well.
Last two graphs are from The Skeptics Handbook II.