LOL!!!! Sciency People At RC Still Have This Graph Up!

image

You can find it here with another fantastically stupid graph.  http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=15665

I won’t bore people with repeating my post The Dagger In The Heart? Maybe….. A Remedial Explanation Of Marcott’s HS Blade ……. Mikey? What’s That About A Dagger?  But, if you’re not familiar, I think it’s still worth the read.  But, I will make a couple of observations. 

But, here’s the hilarious part.  Team Marcott told them this isn’t valid.  In their silly Q&A which RC hosted!!!!  http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/03/response-by-marcott-et-al/  They had this to say …..

Q: Is the rate of global temperature rise over the last 100 years faster than at any time during the past 11,300 years?

A: Our study did not directly address this question because the paleotemperature records used in our study have a temporal resolution of ~120 years on average, which precludes us from examining variations in rates of change occurring within a century.

And, at least in that, team Marcott was correct.  You can’t just slap an annual or 5 year smooth graph onto a graph with a 120 year resolution and pretend that’s science or math!  You would have thought the idjits at RC would have taken it down and hidden their embarrassment.  But, no, it’s still there.  Worse, other lunatics are using it for their propaganda!!!  See here for a HuffPo conversation

But, just too illustrate.  Here’s HadCruts global temp record.  In the graph above we see they’re showing HadCru to go from just under –0.4 C to + 0.4C which you can get to by using a 20 year mean.  But, Marcott said theirs was a 120 year resolution.  So, thanks to WFT site, I’ll plot both of them.  The red line is what RC shows, the green is what should have been placed on the graph in conjunction with Marcott.

image

I drew lines to show the increase which should have been plotted instead of what was.  It should have shown a 0.15 C increase.  Instead, RC chose to be dishonest and misrepresent things.  I say dishonest because the it looks like Rhamy posted it, and Gavin, to be sure, commented on the post.  I’m quite sure both of them know better.  They just let it roll and deceived poor unsuspecting HuffPo losers to display their ignorance.  Funny, but, a bit sad and pathetic. 

But, I’m glad they did.  The demonstrate for all the world their devotion to science …… which is about zero. 

h/t Hank 

This entry was posted in Climate. Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to LOL!!!! Sciency People At RC Still Have This Graph Up!

  1. Latitude says:

    I honestly do not understand how otherwise smart people….fall for this at all
    …and there are some

    Every temp reconstruction shows jump ups and jump downs….for even a longer period of time than their so called global warming record

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/09/hockey-stick-observed-in-noaa-ice-core-data/

  2. dan says:

    heard on CtoC that the Antarctic ice is ‘thin and slushy-ice’ so it doesn’t count ….and besides ,
    glaciers are melting in Switzerland….yawn….meanwhile I had frost yesterday and I have to go
    cut wood to keep Milo warm this winter and I’m running out of drying weather.

  3. tom0mason says:

    Are you sure they are not trying to rely on the sleeper effect where exposure times between initial message and cue re-enforcement are important. I suspect a lot of CAGW/climate change publicity try this approach.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeper_effect

    Also there is Effective Frequency which is similar. In advertising, the effective frequency is the number of times a person must be exposed to an advertising message before a response is made and before exposure is considered wasteful.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_frequency

    Note at no time are these exposed required to understand, they just have to feel the need and know the message.

    • Me says:

      And when that doesn’t work, reinforce it with a treat. Obama Phone! 😆

    • suyts says:

      LOL, I’m absolutely sure that’s what they’re doing. This was one of the flaws of skeptics in the early years. If we adequately responded to an issue, we thought it dead and didn’t bother with it again, only to have the same issue pop back up over and over again. So much so, that things simply became accepted as fact even though skeptics had more than adequately responded.

  4. dan says:

    It’s gonna be a cold winter…I saw the Indians putting up a lot of firewood…. 🙂
    if anyone hasn’t heard the whole joke:

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitalweathergang/2008/11/winter_weather_joke.html

  5. HankH says:

    That graph is wrong on so many different levels. Their showing it and making something out of Marcott’s reconstruction post 1850 amounts to a parlor trick.

    • suyts says:

      Yes. And, I need to thank you! I was able to sneak another persona back onto HuffPo!!! We’ll see how long it takes them to ban me again.

    • HankH says:

      LOL, It appears I got banned now. None of the replies I made this morning got posted. The thing is I did’t break any site rules. I guess they don’t like it when someone can defend their position when that position goes against their ideology. They cut me off when I delivered the coup de gras.

      • Latitude says:

        LOL…you two!
        I don’t understand the banning thing….everyone just comes back with a different handle…and that makes it look like even more people

      • HankH says:

        Oh boy! It looks like someone found my last comment in the bit bucket and decided to let it see light. It took over two hours but it suddenly showed up. It’s going to be fun from here. 😀

      • suyts says:

        LOL, yeh, that’s another ploy of theirs. Wait until no one will see the comment. You’ll know when you get the message, “This email has been permanently removed …..” They’re hilarious.

      • HankH says:

        Ah yes. That thought entered my mind. I was thinking either they wanted to wait until the audience moved on so nobody would notice or were buying time for some big gun to step in and thoroughly trash our arguments. Sly they are.

        • DirkH says:

          They must pay some moron to do that kind of manipulation.
          A colleague of mine who considers himself a conservative – I always correct him and tell him that he sounds like a typical collectivist – proudly proclaimed today that he found an American medium he likes. I asked, which one. He said HuffPo. I told him they’re far out loony left.

          He’s such an idiot. But he takes it in stride. He’s one of my bosses, actually.

        • HankH says:

          They must.

          I’ve been debating the article HuffPo posted several days back claiming that the Colorado flood was caused by global warming. I’m driving the locals crazy. LOL, I got chewed out by one person for having an unfair advantage by being well versed on the subject. Think about that. My opinion should not be expressed because I know the subject too well. Typical leftist thinking.

        • DirkH says:

          “My opinion should not be expressed because I know the subject too well.”

          LOL! Next you’ll demand that the liberal you’re debating isn’t stoned!

        • suyts says:

          LOL!!! Yep, that’s the HuffPo I’ve come to know and love!!! Hank what’s wrong with you commenting about stuff you know about?!?!?! It’s just not fair!!! That’s why I often drink when arguing with leftards. It makes it fair and interesting. Or to steal a phrase and paraphrasing, …… beating leftards with half by brain tied behind my back!

        • HankH says:

          I’m splitting a gut laughing at the “half my brain tied behind my back.” 😆

          Seriously, I’m trying to not be so unfair. I had two glasses of Cabernet when you stepped in and started tying them up with your cruel logic. 😀

        • suyts says:

          I’m glad you’re drinking. You’re conscience can be clear then. 😀

      • philjourdan says:

        Religions do not tolerate dissent.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s