4 ms·

There were claims of evidence tampering; later research using different methods of measuring global temperature showed ... a hockey stick. That's the nice thing

There were claims of evidence tampering; later research using different methods of measuring global temperature showed ... a hockey stick. That's the nice thing about science: there are often multiple ways of confirming many results. For example, see the post-2010 studies mentioned in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_graph#2010_onwards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_graph#2010_onward... ... hockey sticks galore.

phkahler 9y ago
Other models showing the hockey stick does not negate the fact (??) that someone else made a rigged model to show a hockey stick. The point of bringing up the bad model isn't to refute climate change, it's to show that people will go to great lengths to "prove" climate change regardless of the data. It's a statement about politics invading science. Something we need to be acutely aware of when trying to address problems at a global level. note: the ?? above is to indicate my own uncertainty about the rigged model. I didn't see it myself. It's unfortunate that "truth" is so elusive.
- Oletros 9y ago
  > Other models showing the hockey stick does not negate the fact (??) that someone else made a rigged model to show a hockey stick I hope you will provide links to back the claim that it was rigged, isn't?
- greglindahl 9y ago
  These are observations, not models. Given that the hockey stick turns out to be observed in other datasets, in fact all datasets, and no misconduct was found after an investigation, you're really not going to convince anyone that there was a "rigged model" unless they already thought that.
  - phkahler 9y ago
    Perhaps it wasn't deliberate and I was reading from a source with an agenda, but the model did suck: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/403256/global-warming-bombshell/ https://www.technologyreview.com/s/403256/global-warming-bom...

phkahler 9y ago

Other models showing the hockey stick does not negate the fact (??) that someone else made a rigged model to show a hockey stick. The point of bringing up the bad model isn't to refute climate change, it's to show that people will go to great lengths to "prove" climate change regardless of the data. It's a statement about politics invading science. Something we need to be acutely aware of when trying to address problems at a global level. note: the ?? above is to indicate my own uncertainty about the rigged model. I didn't see it myself. It's unfortunate that "truth" is so elusive.

Oletros 9y ago
> Other models showing the hockey stick does not negate the fact (??) that someone else made a rigged model to show a hockey stick I hope you will provide links to back the claim that it was rigged, isn't?
greglindahl 9y ago
These are observations, not models. Given that the hockey stick turns out to be observed in other datasets, in fact all datasets, and no misconduct was found after an investigation, you're really not going to convince anyone that there was a "rigged model" unless they already thought that.
- phkahler 9y ago
  Perhaps it wasn't deliberate and I was reading from a source with an agenda, but the model did suck: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/403256/global-warming-bombshell/ https://www.technologyreview.com/s/403256/global-warming-bom...