Sentences with phrase «stick graph did»

So the evidence for support of the hockey stick graph are more hockey stick graphs done by the same group of scientists who all know each and who all work together.

Not exact matches

Like other temperature reconstructions done since 2001 (see graph), it shows greater variability than the original hockey stick.

In 2010 Dr. Richard Muller criticized the «hockey stick» graph and decided to do his own temperature analysis.

You can stick to plotting straight line or quadratic graphs if you like but it does also have the functionality of plotting in 3D too.

The «Hockey Stick» graph did not show them, and its existence has been disputed by AGW advocates.

Michael Mann, a professor at Pennsylvania State University (famed for his tree - ring - based «hockey stick» graph of global warming) and one of the authors of the hacked e-mails, explained that scientists often use the work «trick» to refer to a way of solving a problem, i.e. «that'll do the trick.»

Various dubious techniques were used to promote this idea, such as the infamoous «hockey - stick» graph produced by Michael Mann in which proxy temperature series that did not support the narrative were truncated.

During 2017, there were 150 graphs from 122 scientific papers published in peer - reviewed journals that indicated modern temperatures are not unprecedented, unusual, or hockey - stick - shaped — nor do they fall outside the range of natural variability.

For example, understanding that global warming is not a proven science and that there is no circumstantial evidence for global warming alarmism — which is why we see goats like political charlatans like Al Gore showing debunked graphs like the «hockey stick» to scare the folks — and, not understanding that climate change the usual thing not the unusual thing and that the climate change we observed can be explained by natural causes is the only thing that really separates we the people from superstitious and ignorant government - funded schoolteachers on the issue of global warming... that and the fact that global warming alarmists do not believe in the scientific method nor most of the principles upon which the country was founded.

I don't think that there has been a similar rate of technological advance in hockey sticks, so I'm sure that the wheelchair graph must be an improvement.

Basically the climatologists who have produced hockey stick shaped graphs have done so by carefully selecting proxies that produce the results they want.

In their brief, the CEI Defendants suggest that the University of East Anglia's investigation actually found that the hockey stick graph was «misleading» because it did not identify that certain data was «truncated» and that other proxy and instrumental temperature data had been spliced together... This allegation is yet another example of Defendants» attempts to obfuscate the evidence in this case.

On the matter of Dr. Jones» use of the phrase «trick» in an email referring to Michael Mann's Hockey Stick graph, the Committee concludes: «Critics of CRU have suggested that Professor Jones's use of the word «trick» is evidence that he was part of a conspiracy to hide evidence that did not fit his view that recent global warming is predominately caused by human activity.

The 2001 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report included evidence in the form of a «hockey stick» graph, showing that the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) did not exist.

What the NAS did was validate the latter half of the Hockey Stick, but said, without extra information or evidence, they could not validate the first half of the graph.

Mr. Watts, while you are presenting this new study by Melvin et al. as something that provides results which allegedly refute Mann's hockey stick you do not tell your audience here that the temperature reconstruction shown in the graph, explicitly mentioned by you here, in the Melvin et al paper is done only for a region of Northern Scandinavia, unlike the temperature reconstruction in Mann et al., (1999), doi: 10.1029 / 1999GL900070, which was a reconstruction of the Northern Hemispheric temperature.

The hockey stick graph which eliminated the MWP and the LIA is because they don't respond to extremes.

This obviously casts down on the meaningfulness of the long, relatively flat handle of the «hockey stick» graphs — after all, if the trees failed to respond to the warming of the 20th century, how can we know they didn't similarly fail to respond to something like the medieval warm period?

So what the climate scientists did in some of the hockey stick graphs, according to the skeptics, was delete the tree ring data starting in 1960, replacing them with the actual temperatures.

64) Michael Mann of Penn State University has actually shown that the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age did in fact exist, which contrasts with his earlier work which produced the «hockey stick graph» which showed a constant temperature over the past thousand years or so followed by a recent dramatic upturn.

During 2017, there were 150 graphs from 122 scientific papers published in peer - reviewed journals indicating modern temperatures are not unprecedented, unusual, or hockey - stick - shaped — nor do they fall outside the range of natural variability.

Yes, that's why I welcome SebastianH's and Philip Clarke's contributions... as long as they don't cross the line into personal attacks and ad homs and fabricated quotes and links to falsified graphs (i.e., Mann's hockey stick).

RE: Your 2nd Objection: The reason I used the phrase -RCB- «Apparently, among other things, this alludes to [seeks to validate] Mike Mann's disputed hockey stick graph...» -LCB--- is because I didn't want to be presumptuous & declare that you were saying something which perhaps you were not saying.

Judging from other comments, you don't have any problem with people accusing others of malfeasance (see the post immediately following mine, which you didn't see fit to comment on), and I can not see how on earth talking about the hockey stick graph is off topic on a post... about the hockey stick graph.

I'd like to know if Brian now understands how the «trick» was done, and if that changes his assessment of whether the hockey stick graph was fraudulent.

-LSB-...](Climate) History By Doug Payton Steve McIntyre, who's done his own, unpaid, work discrediting the global warming «hockey stick» graph, notices some funny business when -LSB-...]

Also, I'm not trying to be argumentative, but I do want to understand the consensus view of the validity on Mann's hockey stick graph.

Before I looked more deeply into the AGW hypothesis all I knew about it was Al Gore and the Hockey Stick graph, as did most casual observers.

At a glans the 2009 graph by Mann et al. doesn't look anything like the «hokey stick» (or are the most recent decades still differing from the others?).

The Vostok ice core had stopped me in my tracks because it seemed to suggest definitive evidence of CO2 attribution (though we now know the effect comes before the cause), but it was the hockey stick graph that caused me to do a U-turn, because it implied so plainly that today's temperature was unprecendented in magnitude and rate of change.

-------- * Why did the BBC fail to show the error bars in the hockey stick graph?

In 2010 Dr. Richard Muller criticized the «hockey stick» graph and decided to do his own temperature analysis.

But correction of the errors it pointed out did not substantially change the shape of the hockey - stick graph.

If you write that the hockey - stick graph «has been discredited», you have a good chance of getting away with it, but that doesn't stop it being a wrong fact.

A lot of real scientists from around the world (including Canadian professors Tim Ball, Fred Michel and Ian Clark) who had studied the history of earth's weather over hundreds of millions of years, knew that climate graphs don't look like neat little hockey sticks, and they said so....