First, the hockey stick was based on tree ring data for the historical record. That data was independently checked with other measurements and found to be in agreement. But from 1960 the tree rings and actual instrumental records diverged. So the instrumental records were used instead. So suspect data was replaced by actual data.
Secondly, Saiers was fired for not following the recognised procedure for comments and replies, and actively conspired to prevent rebuttal of the so-called debunking of the hockey stick.
Actually, this was yet another example of academic fraud. The data was corrupted beyond recognition in order to support a predetermined conclusion. Not much has changed.
3 comments:
It was up on No Minister a week ago Peter.
http://nominister.blogspot.com/2009/11/paper-clip-man.html
Just a problem or two Peter.
First, the hockey stick was based on tree ring data for the historical record. That data was independently checked with other measurements and found to be in agreement. But from 1960 the tree rings and actual instrumental records diverged. So the instrumental records were used instead. So suspect data was replaced by actual data.
Secondly, Saiers was fired for not following the recognised procedure for comments and replies, and actively conspired to prevent rebuttal of the so-called debunking of the hockey stick.
All jolly hockey sticks, what, old chap?
Luc
Actually, this was yet another example of academic fraud. The data was corrupted beyond recognition in order to support a predetermined conclusion. Not much has changed.
LGM
Post a Comment