Jeff ID at The Air Vent remarks:
Honestly there are times when I feel sorry for Mann, his role in history will not be a good one in the long term but it was brought about by an initial mistake in his early papers. After the accolades he received for his 98, 99 work the censored directory was created with a corrected PCA reconstruction. What should he do, phone the UN — um world, I screwed up a little…..His reaction, of course, has been the opposite. He doubled down, creating one reconstruction after another using math which is actually worse than the original.
So here’s the question,
Where would the IPCC be without the proxy based reconstructions?
It’s a scary question because if the climatologists were to excise the bad paleo stuff, IMHO the AGW story is strengthened rather than damaged.
Lots of good discussion regarding that on his site and I’ll add my 1 cent worth here.
The AGW story isn’t strengthened, but that depends on what you mean by AGW.
AGW = Anthropogenic (man made) Global Warming. If you’re talking to one person it means one thing, if you’re talking to Al Gore, Dr. Hansen, or various extremists it means something entirely different.
And that’s the problem.
Mann’s (and Gore’s) hockey stick was never about the .6C of warming that we’ve had over the last 120 years or so. It was, and always has been about the catastrophe. The impending DOOM caused by the actions of loutish humans (and then Gore buys mansions with the energy usage of a small country…)
Two entirely separate issues.
So let’s set some definitions:
- GW = Global Warming and is simply the state of the world warming, by whatever cause.
- AGW = Anthropogenic (man made) Global Warming. People done it. It also implies that the warming is a bad thing and that people are bad for doing it.
- CAGW = Catastrophic AGW. This is what we saw with Gore’s fantasy-horror flick, An Inconvenient Truth. Also this is what’s typical of alarmist/extremist remarks regarding GW. WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE UNLESS WE SHAPE UP NOW!!!!
- Alarmist = one who buys into the CAGW argument
- Extremist/hysteric = one who buys into the extreme CAGW remarks, such as this one.
- Denier/denialist = one who denies the reality of CAGW, but it is used and intended as an insult along the lines of one who denies reality, such as denying the existence of the Holocaust.
- Sceptic = someone who wants a little proof supporting the concept.
There is good evidence that the world has warmed a bit, even without the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effects, however there is zero evidence …
- that there is an impending catastrophe,
- that there is a tipping point (unless it’s to tip down to the next ice age,)
- that anything about the current, slight, warming is unprecedented.
There is solid evidence that some warming is a good thing.
So is the case for AGW stengthened in Mann’s “science” disappeared? Well…
- GW – yes, only because the hockey stick is a major distraction from reality
- AGW – no, but energy use to debunk bad science could be used to look for what’s real regarding human effects, if any, on climate.
- CAGW – definitely weakened, since the major support for CAGW is the hockey stick. With that gone there’s nothing left but wishful thinking on the part of the alarmist/extremist crowd.