Given the fact the last decade of globally cooling temperatures has totally erased what was a Global Warming spike, some statisticians have been back looking at the graph that started the hysteria back a the end of the 20th century. What has been found is disturbing. I cannot link to the post directly at Ice Cap (something I wish they would fix with their sit) but here is the bottom line:

Ok, two days ago I published a report on the data called The All Important Blade of the Stick Uses Less Than 5% of the Data. This report detailed what I consider powerful evidence that Mann and his group may have intentionally manipulated data in creating this paper.  I don’t say this lightly.

It is very clear that the proxies, which no one is sure represent temperature, were in fact extended using questionable statistics and then correlated to demonstrate that they match measured temperature. The addition of an up slope to 90% of the data was pasted on according to less than 5% of the data.  I am very suspicious that this 5% was chosen specifically because of its up slope in recent times. Think about that only 55 series determined the outcome of the majority of the 1209 series data!!

 

What this says, in no-Geek english, is Mann, et al cherry picked 5% of the data to feed into their models, apparently because that 5% would provide the impression of serious global warming. To prove this the scientists plots the models with the selected 5% and then all the rejected data sets. Low and behold – no global warming. Here’s the graph (larger image here):

The blue line is the selected data sets, the purple the rejected. Are we to believe coincidence alone was able to create two views of the global climate – one where there is a crisis in warming and one where there is not? From the linked report here is the conclusion of the statistical analysis:

My conclusion overall is that the blade of the hockey stick (prior to the temp curve overlay) doesn’t even exist.  It was fabricated by an amazingly low number of proxies (under 55) and painted into the remaining series to claim a high degree of correlation. These 55 series were selected after throwing out an additional 148 proxies 64 of which had data which could have been used for extrapolation. This tossing of the data was done for unexplained reasons!

I seriously doubt this extraordinary dichotomoy of the 5% selected and the 95% ignored was accidental. Which means we may have discovered a concerted effort to doctor scientific data in order to try and induce panic and fear across the global community so that trillion$ of dollar$ would be funneled to groups who pomise to save us from imminent destruction. 

Now that has got to be the scam of all scams right there!

 

Tags: Faked Data, Global Warming