Tuesday, August 05, 2014

Color Blind

The National Review, through its lawyers has filed a new pleading in Mann vs. Steyn as it has popularly been labelled.  Now Eli, not being a lawyer is not going to go through the lawyerly stuff, e.g.

Dr. Mann Cannot Demonstrate Actual Malice By Clear and Convincing Evidence Because National Review Sincerely Believes In The Truth Of The Statements
Read in context, Steyn’s commentary was protected rhetorical hyperbole, not a literal accusation of fraud or data falsification

Lowry’s phrase “intellectually bogus and wrong” is not actionable
which appear to be somewhat in contradiction, but one thing in the brief, emphasized by Willard Tony struck Eli as world class
 Third, critics have argued that the hockey stick is misleading because it splices together two different types of data without highlighting the change: For roughly the first nine centuries after the year 1000 A.D., the graph shows temperature levels that have been inferred solely from tree-ring samples and other “proxy” data. But from about 1900 onward, the graph relies on readings from modern instruments such as thermometers. In the words of one review conducted by a panel of independent scientists, many consider it “regrettable” that temperature reconstructions “by the IPCC and others” neglected to emphasize “the discrepancy between instrumental and tree-based proxy reconstructions of temperature during the late 20th century.” 
 Eli, being a RTFR type of bunny went and read Watts Up With That.

Eli has a copy of a figure from Tom Fuller guesting as the local expert on WUWT showing the MBH99 reconstruction as featured in the TAR together with the Lamb BON (back of napkin) sketch that John Mashey has had such fun with

for the colorblind in the IPCC TAR featured figure on the right, the black is the smoothed proxy reconstruction, the red the instrumental data.  Don't believe everything you read over there.


Steve Bloom said...

Although, perhaps rhetorical hyperbole is the only thing Steyn believes in.

Also, while I haven't RTFSed this, I notice that '"regrettable"' modifies "neglected to emphasize," the latter being a paraphrase. What is the actual phrase and its context, the bunnies wonder.

John Mashey said...

Note: in the "What warming" image, the claim: "exactly as shown in the 1990s report" of the IPCC .. is FALSE, as Eli alludes to.

The real graph:
had (c) in upper left
had 5 less capitals
used san serif font
was titled "years before present"
The curve is OK, but the eagle-eyed notice these things. (Ethon?)

Anyone who used the off-chart did *not* get it from IPCC(1990), and hence did not read the caveats in the text around it, pp.l199-203. In academe, this is usually called false citation.

The image Eli showed does look identical to:
The Significance of the Hockey Stick, McIntyre(2005)
Sadly, when Tom Curtis asked Mr McIntyre where he got it, the answer was:
"I don’t recall where I picked up the version used in the post."

However, another image that looks identical appeared by 2001 on the website of John Daly, who happened to be a "science advisor" for the Western Fuels Association, i.e., Powder River, WY coal. See PDF p.12.

Magma said...

I wonder how much the National Review hates burning through its small cash reserves defending Steyn like this. It probably would have capitulated with an apology and retraction long ago if it hadn't painted itself into a corner, and wasn't terrified of losing any remaining credibility among its small readership.

Anonymous said...

Better search.

Mann lawyer tobacco.

Go on Mashey go after Mike fraud Mann for using tobacco money and power to sue people.

"The graphs have a different font, different caps, the curve is OK..." lol Thanks for the lol.

Anonymous said...

"I thought I’d play around with some randomly generated time-series and see if I could ‘reconstruct’ northern hemisphere temperatures.
[...] The reconstructions clearly show a ‘hockey-stick’ trend. I guess this is
precisely the phenomenon that Macintyre has been going on about."

Anonymous said...

"I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should
never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year
“reconstruction”. "

corrector said...

Typical warmsish attempt at confusion.

Warmists are frauds, period.


The Little Nice Age of National Review gave way to the Not Nice At All, or Neoconicene
era shortly after Buckley's demise. Adding Neocans like Seyn and Frum to the mix merely made matters worse.


John should recall that Bill's son Christo Buckley is
best known for the film of Thank You For Smoking

I will now return to hand rolling more cigarettes to try to keep lit as I body surf in soidarity with Eli.

John Mashey said...

For better or worse, William F. Buckley was at least an interesting intellectual who could sometimes change his mind. In some sense, it's almost too bad he isn't around to comment on the rise of the Tea Party.

EliRabett said...

For Eli, the word describing Wm. Buckley was fatuous, not interesting. George Will does a miserable imitation.

Anonymous said...

Well, I finally make it to Singapore where I can access sites that the Great Chinese Firewall blocks. And what do I see here but a resurrection of sorts. How kind of you to keep mentioning me. Especially when your post has no real point. Of course that isn't rare, actually.

Perhaps the most useful phrase on this site is found on the comment page. Please prove you're not a robot. C'mon, Rabbit. Can you pass the Turing test? (Not when you're talking about climate or your opponents, but maybe on some arcane subject...)

tonylearns said...

I met WFB when he drove me and my brothers to a swimming hole in VT when he was visiting JKG. He was an insane driver on very uneven dirt roads. As a 12 year old I was fascinated with their lively arguments about politics. Nixon was still in office and Galbraith said not for long.
Buckley was quite an affable man, very engaging, friendly and spontaneous. He didn't seem to have the same logical rigor as JKG, and I frankly thought he did not win any argument with him.

Steve Bloom said...

What, is that Fuller? I keep thinking he's dead.


I thought a miserable imitation of fatuity was Watts' metier, not Wills'.

WFB & JKG got on like a house afire-.

bill said...

WFB and ANC, on the other hand...


Much as I approbate how Chomsky shares Eisenhower's dim view of Asian land wars, it is he who goes Godwin in that clip.

Susan Anderson said...

Can't resist, though I should, having nothing substantive to add, but:

Hooey zooey

nice anecdotes.

susan, her mark xxx
(not a robot)