• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pages 2K. 2017 update

Threegoofs

Sophisticated man-about-town
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
63,357
Reaction score
28,664
Location
The city Fox News viewers are afraid to travel to
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I missed this last summer....the updated PAGES 2K was published.

PAGES 2K is the most comprehensive dataset in paleoclimate research, collected from dozens of different climate proxies on a global scale that can give us the best estimate of what global temps have been the last 2000 years or so.

This database keeps on expanding, and future publications will continue to help refine and narrow the uncertainty ranges. It currently has almost 700 different records from about as many locations distributed worldwide.

Publication is here:
A global multiproxy database for temperature reconstructions of the Common Era | Scientific Data

And Stephan Rahmsdorf, the well known oceanographer and climate scientist has posted this helpful graph, showing how the Pages 2k data fits in with the Mann Northern Hemisphere data and the current directly measured temperature records.


You can see how the absolute mass of data here has really narrowed the uncertainty ranges since the original MBH99 paper.

a5e6696b935ca4c35c00ab04fb017721.jpg



Looks like we have enough hockey sticks now for an NHL team.


I look forward to hearing all the armchair experts explain how these hundreds of scientists who contribute to this (who are by definition the top people in their field) have no idea what they are doing.
 
The usual flaws.

"Rosanne D’Arrigo once explained to an astounded National Academy of Sciences panel that you had to pick cherries if you wanted to make cherry pie – a practice followed by D’Arrigo and Jacoby who, for their reconstructions, selected tree ring chronologies which went the “right” way and discarded those that went the wrong way – a technique which will result in hockey sticks even from random red noise. Her statement caused a flurry of excitement among Climategate correspondents, but unfortunately the NAS panel didn’t address or explain the defects in this technique to the lignumphilous paleoclimate community.
My long-standing recommendation to the paleoclimate community has been to define a class of proxy using ex ante criteria e.g. treeline black spruce chronologies, Antarctic ice cores etc., but once the ex ante criterion is selected, use a “simple” method on all members of the class. The benefits of such a procedure seem obvious, but the protocol is stubbornly resisted by the paleoclimate community. The PAGES paleoclimate community have recently published a major compilation of climate series from the past millennium, but, unfortunately, their handling of data which goes the “wrong” way is risible.
The PAGES 2017 collation is a successor dataset to the PAGES 2013 collation, aspects of which I discussed a few years ago. Not included in my previous discussion was their North American tree ring collection, which stubbornly included the same stripbark bristlecone chronologies of Mann et al 1998-9, while claiming to be “independent”. In total, there were 146 North American tree ring series in PAGES2K (2013).
PAGES2K (2017) contains almost exactly the same number (150) of North American tree ring series, but, if you look at the second tab (Table S2) of its Supplementary Information – an excerpt of which is shown below, one series after another was rejected because it had a “negative relation to temperature.”. . . "


PAGES2017: New Cherry Pie

Jul 11, 2017 – 11:31 PM
Rosanne D’Arrigo once explained to an astounded National Academy of Sciences panel that you had to pick cherries if you wanted to make cherry pie – a practice followed by D’Arrigo and Jacoby who, for their reconstructions, selected tree ring chronologies which went the “right” way and discarded those that went the wrong way – […]

By Steve McIntyre| Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (279)
 
Last edited:
The usual flaws.

"Rosanne D’Arrigo once explained to an astounded National Academy of Sciences panel that you had to pick cherries if you wanted to make cherry pie – a practice followed by D’Arrigo and Jacoby who, for their reconstructions, selected tree ring chronologies which went the “right” way and discarded those that went the wrong way – a technique which will result in hockey sticks even from random red noise. Her statement caused a flurry of excitement among Climategate correspondents, but unfortunately the NAS panel didn’t address or explain the defects in this technique to the lignumphilous paleoclimate community.
My long-standing recommendation to the paleoclimate community has been to define a class of proxy using ex ante criteria e.g. treeline black spruce chronologies, Antarctic ice cores etc., but once the ex ante criterion is selected, use a “simple” method on all members of the class. The benefits of such a procedure seem obvious, but the protocol is stubbornly resisted by the paleoclimate community. The PAGES paleoclimate community have recently published a major compilation of climate series from the past millennium, but, unfortunately, their handling of data which goes the “wrong” way is risible.
The PAGES 2017 collation is a successor dataset to the PAGES 2013 collation, aspects of which I discussed a few years ago. Not included in my previous discussion was their North American tree ring collection, which stubbornly included the same stripbark bristlecone chronologies of Mann et al 1998-9, while claiming to be “independent”. In total, there were 146 North American tree ring series in PAGES2K (2013).
PAGES2K (2017) contains almost exactly the same number (150) of North American tree ring series, but, if you look at the second tab (Table S2) of its Supplementary Information – an excerpt of which is shown below, one series after another was rejected because it had a “negative relation to temperature.”. . . "


PAGES2017: New Cherry Pie

Jul 11, 2017 – 11:31 PM
Rosanne D’Arrigo once explained to an astounded National Academy of Sciences panel that you had to pick cherries if you wanted to make cherry pie – a practice followed by D’Arrigo and Jacoby who, for their reconstructions, selected tree ring chronologies which went the “right” way and discarded those that went the wrong way – […]

By Steve McIntyre| Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (279)

The armchair expert chimes in.
 
You apparently missed the initial debunking of this cherry pie.

[h=3]Cherry Picking and AGW Advocacy[/h]

Again... it was just published in Nature. Hundreds of scientists are involved, including virtually all the experts in paleoclimatology.

But your blogs understand the science better!

Sometimes your credulity boggles the mind.
 
Again... it was just published in Nature. Hundreds of scientists are involved, including virtually all the experts in paleoclimatology.

But your blogs understand the science better!

Sometimes your credulity boggles the mind.

Published last July.

Elsewhere in this subforum there are some good pieces on "groupthink," an essential part of the increasingly tortured defense of AGW orthodoxy. The methodological myopia of the orthodox paleoclimate community is part of that. As McIntyre observed:

. . . My long-standing recommendation to the paleoclimate community has been to define a class of proxy using ex ante criteria e.g. treeline black spruce chronologies, Antarctic ice cores etc., but once the ex ante criterion is selected, use a “simple” method on all members of the class. The benefits of such a procedure seem obvious, but the protocol is stubbornly resisted by the paleoclimate community. The PAGES paleoclimate community have recently published a major compilation of climate series from the past millennium, but, unfortunately, their handling of data which goes the “wrong” way is risible. . . .
 
The usual flaws.

Rosanne D’Arrigo once explained to an astounded National Academy of Sciences panel that you had to pick cherries if you wanted to make cherry pie – a practice followed by D’Arrigo and Jacoby who, for their reconstructions, selected tree ring chronologies which went the “right” way and discarded those that went the wrong way – a technique which will result in hockey sticks even from random red noise. Her statement caused a flurry of excitement among Climategate correspondents, but unfortunately the NAS panel didn’t address or explain the defects in this technique to the lignumphilous paleoclimate community.
My long-standing recommendation to the paleoclimate community has been to define a class of proxy using ex ante criteria e.g. treeline black spruce chronologies, Antarctic ice cores etc., but once the ex ante criterion is selected, use a “simple” method on all members of the class. The benefits of such a procedure seem obvious, but the protocol is stubbornly resisted by the paleoclimate community. The PAGES paleoclimate community have recently published a major compilation of climate series from the past millennium, but, unfortunately, their handling of data which goes the “wrong” way is risible.
The PAGES 2017 collation is a successor dataset to the PAGES 2013 collation, aspects of which I discussed a few years ago. Not included in my previous discussion was their North American tree ring collection, which stubbornly included the same stripbark bristlecone chronologies of Mann et al 1998-9, while claiming to be “independent”. In total, there were 146 North American tree ring series in PAGES2K (2013).
PAGES2K (2017) contains almost exactly the same number (150) of North American tree ring series, but, if you look at the second tab (Table S2) of its Supplementary Information – an excerpt of which is shown below, one series after another was rejected because it had a “negative relation to temperature.”. . .


PAGES2017: New Cherry Pie

Jul 11, 2017 – 11:31 PM
Rosanne D’Arrigo once explained to an astounded National Academy of Sciences panel that you had to pick cherries if you wanted to make cherry pie – a practice followed by D’Arrigo and Jacoby who, for their reconstructions, selected tree ring chronologies which went the “right” way and discarded those that went the wrong way – […]

By Steve McIntyre| Posted in Uncategorized | Comments (279)

Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

Discarding chronologies that "go the wrong way" from what a researcher would prefer to see is not scientific - it's simply dishonest cheating and lying about results obtained from what was actually allowed to be used in the research! And that's only one example.

As a result, more and more "everyday" people here currently seem to believe that AGW might be nothing more than a new "money grab" plan by the UN to tax only the "wealthier" countries on this planet, and it seems that we are included in that group - however this country has a debt load in excess of $20 trillion dollars, with yearly interest payments on that debt of many billions of dollars so I would argue that with the exception of a few very wealthy people in this country, and considering that a large percentage of our population is currently dependent upon government assistance to survive, I don't agree that we should be expected to pay even more than we already do! :thumbdown:
 
Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

Discarding chronologies that "go the wrong way" from what a researcher would prefer to see is not scientific - it's simply dishonest cheating and lying about results obtained from what was actually allowed to be used in the research! And that's only one example.

As a result, more and more "everyday" people here currently seem to believe that AGW might be nothing more than a new "money grab" plan by the UN to tax only the "wealthier" countries on this planet, and it seems that we are included in that group - however this country has a debt load in excess of $20 trillion dollars, with yearly interest payments on that debt of many billions of dollars so I would argue that with the exception of a few very wealthy people in this country, and considering that a large percentage of our population is currently dependent upon government assistance to survive, I don't agree that we should be expected to pay even more than we already do! :thumbdown:

That's exactly what it is. A money grab. There are billions of grant dollars by world government for the climate sciences, but the grants are to show AGW is a threat.

Follow the money...
 
You apparently missed the initial debunking of this cherry pie.

[h=3]Cherry Picking and AGW Advocacy[/h]

when are you going to learn
It was published by warmists,
It supportst AGW theory, ipso facto it's beyond criticism.
also each one of those warmist scientists agree that each of the others is right. Kind of like Nancy Pelosi agrres that Chuch Schumber is right about gun control. Bernie Sander concurss, and so does Kamala HArris.


LAFF
 
when are you going to learn
It was published by warmists,
It supportst AGW theory, ipso facto it's beyond criticism.
also each one of those warmist scientists agree that each of the others is right. Kind of like Nancy Pelosi agrres that Chuch Schumber is right about gun control. Bernie Sander concurss, and so does Kamala HArris.


LAFF

It’s a conspiracy!
 
Back
Top Bottom