Hockey Stick Revisited in Brand New Context

[jbg]

The pace of climate change has often been described as a hockey stick (link) with dire consequences. Here's another such circumstance. According to figures from Weather Underground for White Plains, New York (link), which also has daylight statistics, we are losing daylight at an accelerating pitch.

For example, on June 21, 2010 we had the length the day was 15 hours 8 minutes. Ten (10) days later, on July 1, 2010 we had 14 hours, 56 minutes, a drop of 12 minutes. Not too serious.

Alarmingly, between October 10, 2010 and October 20, 2010 we dropped from 11 hours 21 minutes to 10 hours 54 minutes, a loss of 27 minutes.

This means to me that we are on an accelerating course to 100% darkness which, if unchecked, will clog New York Harbor with ice. Musk ox will shortly be pawing the ground in Central Park.

We need drastic action to avoid oblivion!!!

[Michael Hardner]

Is this supposed to be funny ? Because, otherwise there's no point to it.

The last blog that I linked to from MLW criticizing the hockey stick still ended up with something like an 80% confidence level on warming. That's something for discussion, (especially given the data selection that was used, but anyway) but certainly not enough for people to claim fraud and so on.

No, this part of the public debate should probably turn to mitigation vs adaption and I think there's a thread for that.

[jbg]

Is this supposed to be funny ? Because, otherwise there's no point to it.

The last blog that I linked to from MLW criticizing the hockey stick still ended up with something like an 80% confidence level on warming. That's something for discussion, (especially given the data selection that was used, but anyway) but certainly not enough for people to claim fraud and so on.

No, this part of the public debate should probably turn to mitigation vs adaption and I think there's a thread for that.

No, not time for mitigation or adaptation. Time for panic.

[Shady]

The hockey stick has been completely discredited.

[Shady]

No, not time for mitigation or adaptation. Time for panic.

He's right Michael. Just look at the trend line!

[jbg]

He's right Michael. Just look at the trend line!

It's downright scary!!!We're all going to die fry.

[waldo]

Is this supposed to be funny ? Because, otherwise there's no point to it.

The last blog that I linked to from MLW criticizing the hockey stick still ended up with something like an 80% confidence level on warming. That's something for discussion, (especially given the data selection that was used, but anyway) but certainly not enough for people to claim fraud and so on.

No, this part of the public debate should probably turn to mitigation vs adaption and I think there's a thread for that.

really?... the denier jbg seems to be ignoring (relatively) recent challenges tasked to him... one in particular where he stated an intent for follow-up with an investigatory pursuit - perhaps his real intentions are elsewhere The repeated pattern of jbg failed argument... jbg failed unsubstantiated argument... now has the denier jbg trotting out the 'hockey-stick'... it's certainly no surprise that the morally bankrupt jbg would resort to one of his oft desperate and failed go-to ploys. Literally dozens upon dozens of reconstructions have reaffirmed the original (now decade+ old) reconstruction, some even in recent months... deniers (like jbg) just ignore this inconvenient truth. Formal National Academies of Science inquiry has acknowledged the legitimacy of the original reconstruction... deniers (like jbg) just ignore this inconvenient truth. NAS released a definitive account - Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years... deniers (like jbg) just ignore this inconvenient truth. The principal denier heroes, McIntyre/McKitrick, who have made this the cornerstone of their failed denier "careers"... are quite literally seeing their previously trashed paper attacking the original/early 'hockey-stick' reconstruction(s), picked apart (over and over again) in recent weeks, given the formal academic scrutiny of Wegman - the related frantic back-peddling and change topic mode of McIntyre/McKitrick... yet... another inconvenient truth for deniers (like jbg).

in the context of more recent advances in climate science, in the context of ongoing recent warming, when you actually ask a denier (like jbg), what point of significance they're placing on the repeatedly validated 'hockey-stick' reconstructions, deniers (like jbg) go mute. When you repeatedly challenge deniers (like jbg) to refute 'hockey-stick' reconstructions, deniers (like jbg) resort to blustering, flustering, flailing and wailing - nothing new here... nothing to see here (other than the denier jbg)... move along now.

[Guest TrueMetis]

The hockey stick has been completely discredited.

No Shady it hasn't, deal with it. And who gives a f#ck that people could farm in (part of) Greenland, people have farmed in cold parts of Russia for thousands of years. The medieval warm period, just another bull myth I'm tired of hearing.

Now someone has to explain to jbg the difference between a 1000 years of data and a weeks worth.

[bush_cheney2004]

Hide the Decline II:

[waldo]

No Shady it hasn't, deal with it.

so the lil' twerp finally ventured back into a climate change related thread... I notice another darling denier, B_C, has chimed in as well - fortunately, I have both those twaddlers on mute.

... recent relevant blog posts as here & here - over a recent several months period, the blog presents a progressive account of the recent focus on Wegman/the Wegman Report. Of course, anyone with any understanding of the history/politicization, recognizes where the Wegman Report fits... and the close relationship struck up between Wegman & McIntyre/McKitrick (M&M)... and, of course, how this all ties closely with the U.S. Congressional committee testimony pursuits of Inhofe/Marano. Make sure to follow through the comments - of course, more technically slanted blogs have also taken up the pursuit to significantly scrutinize the M&M 2005 paper and the reliance Wegman placed upon it - more to come... lots more. Nothing hiding the ongoing decline of the vaunted denier hero and self-styled 'slayer of the hockey-stick', Steve McIntyre!

[BubberMiley]

That was one of the craziest storms I've ever seen last week; the 50-year-old concrete boardwalk on the beach by my cottage was reduced to rubble. Suddenly my lakeview cottage is a lot closer to the lake after about 15 feet of bank collapsed.

I fear this is the new normal.

[GostHacked]

so the lil' twerp finally ventured back into a climate change related thread... I notice another darling denier, B_C, has chimed in as well - fortunately, I have both those twaddlers on mute.

Dude, you are not winning any arguments or friends here. Calling everyone an idiot and morally bankrupt and whatever. If you want to be civil, you need to drop the insults.

[Sir Bandelot]

on June 21, 2010 we had the length the day was 15 hours 8 minutes. Ten (10) days later, on July 1, 2010 we had 14 hours, 56 minutes, a drop of 12 minutes. Not too serious.

Alarmingly, between October 10, 2010 and October 20, 2010 we dropped from 11 hours 21 minutes to 10 hours 54 minutes, a loss of 27 minutes.

This means to me that we are on an accelerating course to 100% darkness which, if unchecked, will clog New York Harbor with ice. Musk ox will shortly be pawing the ground in Central Park.

That's right, and this pattern has been observed to repeat itself with great accuracy every year, for thousands of years. Right through human history, in fact. But the notion you raise, that the entire scientific community is involved in a conspiracy to misrepresent the data, only relegates you to the "tin-foil nutter society".

[bush_cheney2004]

so the lil' twerp finally ventured back into a climate change related thread... I notice another darling denier, B_C, has chimed in as well - fortunately, I have both those twaddlers on mute.

I am not a "denier"...I welcome global warming climate change and all that it entails. My pagan god will be pleased. Also, your "mute button" is not working.

[waldo]

Dude, you are not winning any arguments or friends here. Calling everyone an idiot and morally bankrupt and whatever. If you want to be civil, you need to drop the insults.

there isn't any winning arguments with deniers... I occasionally lob a term of endearment when justified - the recent 'idiot' labeling was particularly suited given that idiot's unwillingness to go deeper than his normal deepness (i.e. to recognize the granularity of isotopic variations of CO2... instead, that idiot presumed to pompously school on compound/element characteristics - duh!). The lil' twerp endearment is justified given that lil' twerp's year-long pattern of parroting the 'best' of denier tabloid newspapers... of never, ever being able to substantiate anything when challenged... of repeating the same ole, same ole, even when the parroting has been soundly trashed previously in other MLW threads. The morally bankrupt term of endearment is saved for the those types of morally bankrupt deniers who know their statements have already been dealt with (refuted) in previous MLW threads... they know this, yet will purposely throw up a thread (like this one)... they also can't substantiate positions when challenged - in this regard there is a bit of cross-over between the lil' twerp and the morally bankrupt. Meanwhile temperatures continue to rise, CO2 emissions continue to increase, glaciers continue to recede, arctic ice continues to melt, severe climate devastatingly repeats... and we have the usual suspect MLW deniers out in force - the same parrots with their same routines. The 'hockey-stick'... really? Really?

[GostHacked]

there isn't any winning arguments with deniers... I occasionally lob a term of endearment when justified - the recent 'idiot' labeling was particularly suited given that idiot's unwillingness to go deeper than his normal deepness (i.e. to recognize the granularity of isotopic variations of CO2... instead, that idiot presumed to pompously school on compound/element characteristics - duh!). The lil' twerp endearment is justified given that lil' twerp's year-long pattern of parroting the 'best' of denier tabloid newspapers... of never, ever being able to substantiate anything when challenged... of repeating the same ole, same ole, even when the parroting has been soundly trashed previously in other MLW threads. The morally bankrupt term of endearment is saved for the those types of morally bankrupt deniers who know their statements have already been dealt with (refuted) in previous MLW threads... they know this, yet will purposely throw up a thread (like this one)... they also can't substantiate positions when challenged - in this regard there is a bit of cross-over between the lil' twerp and the morally bankrupt. Meanwhile temperatures continue to rise, CO2 emissions continue to increase, glaciers continue to recede, arctic ice continues to melt, severe climate devastatingly repeats... and we have the usual suspect MLW deniers out in force - the same parrots with their same routines. The 'hockey-stick'... really? Really?

If you want to talk about parroting. You are doing a good job of it yourself.

[waldo]

wow! Zinger. Let's see... I rarely link directly to blogs - when I do it's a purposeful related reference to the topic at hand. When I do link a reference, what I attempt to concentrate on is referencing actual scientific based content/articles and/or actual scientific papers... if that's what you call parroting - guilty, as charged. To me, the real parrots are the MLW types that scour the denier blogs and post the latest every other day 'smoking guns' of the denialsphere... typically, touting trash and splash without any substance and/or legitimate validation and/or accepted scientific foundation. They'll parrot it while having little (if any) actual understanding of what they're parroting.

[Shady]

GH is right waldo. All you do is turn people off of possibly listening to what you have to say.

[Michael Hardner]

Although I do understand why people get personal, the board is so much more interesting to me when people agree to disagree, and also... take their lumps when they're wrong...

[wyly]

If you want to talk about parroting. You are doing a good job of it yourself.

there's a difference in parroting a blog piece and citing legit sources...and parroting also implies the person does not understand what he/she/shady has linked to, this isn't the case with waldo...

[wyly]

Although I do understand why people get personal, the board is so much more interesting to me when people agree to disagree, and also... take their lumps when they're wrong...

ya I hate it when I'm wrong, it stings...accept it, learn from it, move on....

[Michael Hardner]

ya I hate it when I'm wrong, it stings...accept it, learn from it, move on....

Sometimes I hate it, other times I have to acknowledge that I was bested by someone to whom I should have been listening to more closely.

In either case, I am stronger from the experience.

[Shady]

there's a difference in parroting a blog piece and citing legit sources

The problem with waldo is that any source that isn't approved by him, is deemed illegitimate. It shuts down any discussion/debate.

[bush_cheney2004]

Although I do understand why people get personal, the board is so much more interesting to me when people agree to disagree, and also... take their lumps when they're wrong...

They don't even have to be wrong...what's the big frickin' deal about this topic over any other? Clearly the "climate change" camp has taken it in the shorts recently and for some reason they just get more high and mighty when on the defensive. Cap and trade is dead for now, and as long as their spin game continues, the "deniers" win.

[GostHacked]

They don't even have to be wrong...what's the big frickin' deal about this topic over any other? Clearly the "climate change" camp has taken it in the shorts recently and for some reason they just get more high and mighty when on the defensive. Cap and trade is dead for now, and as long as their spin game continues, the "deniers" win.

BC, I agree with you here.