Sunday, 27 February 2011

On Hiding the Decline and Rebuilding Trust part I (of LXXV)

In 1999, the World Meteorological Organization printed a brochure that would have a devastating effect on our society. The brochure featured on its cover the infamous Hockey Stick – a graph with a temperature reconstruction purporting to demonstrate that the alleged recent temperature increase was unprecedented. Almost everybody believed in this graph, and thought it to be the final and ultimate truth. So this graph became the cornerstone in the construction of an unprecedented global warming narrative that came to completely dominate the scientific, political and economical discourse for the next decade. The importance of this WMO cover graph cannot be underestimated. The whole global warming edifice rested on it being correct - this was the single piece of evidence that the warmists had.
But then something happened in 2009. When the Climategate emails were liberated from University of East Anglia, the whole world could see that a trick had been used to hide the decline! The graph did not only contain proxies: the so-called scientist had added actual temperature measurements to make it appear that the temperature had increased the last couple of decades! The proxy data, which were most deceitfully truncated, showed that temperatures were going down! This problem, called the divergence problem, had been carefully hidden in scientific journals where nobody would ever find out about it.
This deceit, yes I do not hesitate to call it a fraud, committed by the notorious Team, a group of activists that are high priests of the IPCC, has fundamentally shaken confidence in climate science. If the Team could remove proxy temperature data that they thought were “bad” from a graph in a WMO brochure and add thermometer data instead, what else could they do? Was there anything in climate science one could trust? The answer was obviously “No”. The public’s trust in climate science was sadly obliterated. Indeed, this scandalous event has led to widespread erosion in people’s trust in science and scientists. Many people don’t believe in physics anymore, and might stop using computers, cellular phones, televisions, microwave ovens and other high technological devices that are based on modern physics. Many people might stop going to medical doctors and start going to witch doctors instead. Many people might start thinking that Earth is flat. Democracy and the modern industrial society are undermined, and feudalism is making a comeback. We are rapidly moving towards a new dark age because of this shameless abuse of a graph in a WMO brochure.
Therefore, it is paramount that we try to rebuild trust in science again. For that purpose, I have started a series of blog posts that will be dedicated to discussing and analyzing the WMO graph and exposing the culprits and bring them to justice and make them take responsibility for this heinous crime. Only by openly and honestly discussing this outrageous event and revealing the truth can the public’s trust in climate science and science in general be at least partially restored.
In this first trust-building post, I want to discuss what adjectives best describe the nefarious and dishonest activities of the Team. After 1000 comments, I will write a second post, and so on. I expect to write about 75 posts on this important subject, until the public’s trust in science, now shattered by the duplicity of the Team in producing that WMO graph from 1999, has been rebuilt. I’m doing this because I believe in science! Nothing, I repeat nothing, can be more important than discussing “hide the decline”. Indeed, I would as far as stating that nothing else matters until this issue has gotten a satisfactory resolution. Until then, all climate science is meaningless and should be ignored.
Ony then can we go on to discuss other importan questions, such as the effect of underwater volcanoes and the iron core sun.


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. I am so pleased you are taking on this challenge. Restoring trust in climate science from the consequences of this dishonest, lazy, and prejudiced graph is of paramount importance. Climate skepticism has been fueled by the absence of information from scientists about how their work is done; their data, mathematics, even the names and locations of their families not published in easily downloadable form. No more tiptoeing around.

  3. The egregiousness of their mendacious duplicity must be exposed. I used to think it was simply brazen buffoonery... no more.

    Vladimir Adler

  4. Endorphin Monkey27 February 2011 10:24

    What was the decline that was hidden? Tree ring analysis as a temperature proxy! Now what would you prefer to trust - tree rings or thermometers? Tree rings of course! The people who make and use thermometers are fallible, liars or both.

    Trees don't lie. If trees say it's getting cooler, then that's what's happening. Trees are tough. Some people accidently hit trees with cars or trucks and a lot of those trees survive. So it's not like trees would be affected by droughts or pollution. Anyone who says otherwise is suspect. I mean, would you sit down and have a beer with someone who prefers climate scientists over trees? I wouldn't.

  5. Baron von Monckhofen27 February 2011 12:38

    I would rather trust a spruce than a Mann any day!

  6. As you allude to my dear Baron, we are on the cusp of a turning point of history.

    All scientific apparatus used in so-called climate "science" should and must be be replaced with their truth-impregnated wooden equivalents at the earliest opportunity and from whatever remains of existing grants after Ferrari have taken their cut (as usual).

  7. Having sat in my study for several days, surrounded by the writings of Galileo and a moist cloth upon my brow I have reasoned the solution to the problem is thus:

    The "hide the decline" culprits must be brought afore me so that they might feel the lash of my belt upon their buttocks. I believe this Steig scoundrel is somehow involved and he too must face the consequences.

    Only after a good flogging can I learn to trust these charlatans again.

  8. Baron, I look forward to participating in the extended peer review of this cover art. The very fact that this was published in the literature demonstrates the moral bankruptcy and complete failure of traditional authoritarian peer "review" by a small cabal of scientists (no longer worthy of that name) intent as acting as gate-keepers of "truth" and 'coincidently' controlling the trillions of tax-payer dollars spent on climate research. They must cringe at the spotlight which will soon be shined on these nefarious deeds.

  9. People now know many so called scientists are just as political as anyone else. And will ignore facts to push a political goal. They ignore the main idea of science which is to have their claims checked out by others. Asking people to believe their claims without allowing people to see your proof and see the data is a religion and not science.
    We are told we have to have faith in Mann and Jones. We are told we have to change our entire life on faith in following these men. We are told if we don't change out ways we will come to a fiery end of the Earth. It sounds just like many religions which call for the same thing.

  10. This cadre of running dog state lackey scientists, toiling away in their lairs to mislead the public and implement the state apparatus's plans for one world government omg must be stopped lest the poor starving masses suffer under the shiny jackboot of the UN One Great Nanny State Domination out to beggar the free world by a massive theft of wealth from the free market led by the false-president Muslim Obama and his far left fascist army of corrupted IPCC scientist horde...


  11. Think of the untold trillions!!!

  12. Dear Baron, much respect for your courage facing the CAGW chihuahuas like a true Jean de Florette. A bientôt, mon petit pois.

  13. Oh dear. I've lost my book. How does one do the inverse Poe's law thing again?

    Probably some sceintist has been rifling my bookshelves. It couldn't possibly be that I'm wrong about where I left the thing and what was written in it. Could it?

  14. shewonk -- "Think of the untold trillions!!!"

    But this is not the venue for talk of fossil fuel tax subsidies. How dare you!

  15. This is all denialist claptrap! If you read the emails in context you will the researchers were just joking!

    They did not really "hide the decline" or consider "if we could reduce the ocean blip by, say, 0.15 degC." To even consider such things would be academic misconduct.

    Really these statements were part of a plan to ferret out who among us is against our plan to save the planet for the children and the polar bears. And it worked! Now we know many people are against our plan to save the world!

  16. When sceintist Sarah Palin takes a look at Mann's spurious hockey stick graph, and puts the real data into it, out comes a more reasonable shape. You can see it looks like a rifle.

    Charleton Hessman. Chaircorpse of the National Guns 'R' for Killin' Librals Asssociation.


Welcome to comment on my blog, dear reader.