Yale Responds to Dilbert; Ross McKitrick Dissects

Dilbert Cartoon on Climate Change Prompts Rebuttal from Yale

The problem is this: they prove Dilbert's case.

While reading through this and summoning up some of the reference papers I came across the issue of Hockey Sticks, Red Noise, and the MBH98/99 data transformation used by certain, if not all, climate modellers. To summarize the MBH98/99 issue, applying the MBH98/99 data transformation to the actual virgin data: when MHB98 is applied to red noise, a hockey stick is produced. Further, data used by various modellers is claimed to be open to the public, but is not and requests for the data are consistently refused. Selection bias for data sources is rampant, using only data sources such as provide presupposed data trends (bristle cone pines), and ignoring others (ice core). The Arctic-melt warming is headlined while the ice increase in the Antarctic is ignored. Sea level is still claimed to be radically rising (with flood photos injected as false proof)... the sea level has not risen, because the Antarctic ice build-up has frozen the water lost by the Arctic and glaciers. Further, the warming that exists has caused extra plant growth, which sequesters both carbon and water.

The Michael Mann [1] MHB98 data transform should be sufficient to disqualify all models which use it.

Dilbert is right. As usual.

Note 1: Amazon: "A Disgrace to the Profession; the world's scientists, in their own words, on Michael Mann, his hockey stick, and their damage to science."