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.
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.