Some Notable Hockey Stick Reconstructions

 For fun I've been collecting hockey sticks. The following are not complete, but I think they're pretty representative. In fact, I even collected the much maligned Loehle 2008 reconstruction, which has been the darling of contrarian "science." There are numerous issues with that reconstruction, which I document here, but I'm including it because doing so doesn't change the fact that all known temperature reconstructions covering anywhere from NH-extratropical temperatures to global mean temperatures have a hockey stick shape if you include the 21st century.

I decided to break this up into three graphs, one showing GMST reconstructions, one showing NH and NH-extratropical reconstructions, and one showing NH-summer and/or NH-growing season reconstructions. I'm showing each with their respective instrumental counterparts (global, NH, and NH-summer). For reconstructions with annual resolution, those are shown faded, but I show running 10-year means for all of them except Loehle 2008. That paper was only able to reconstruct 29-year running means. I show the 95% confidence interval for Pages 2K in the global reconstruction, but I didn't show any confidence intervals in the other graphs because I thought they looked a little too cluttered. For the graph of GMST anomalies, all of the reconstructions show temperatures within the confidence intervals of Pages 2K.

GMST Anomalies

NHMST Anomalies

NHMST Summer or Growing Season Anomalies

This is a total of 14 reconstructions. I'll add more as I find them, but I don't know of any reconstructions that don't have hockey stick shapes when including temperatures from about 1990 on. Each of these are also plotted against the 1850-1900 mean, so they should provide a good indication of how much warmer we are than preindustrial levels


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Data Tampering by Shewchuk and Heller

Image
If you follow climate discussions on X, you're bound to see John Shewchuk and/or Tony Heller show graphs that reportedly show that NOAA is tampering with temperature data to fabricate global warming with spurious warming trends. I've gone over many of the reasons why this is nonsense before in posts about bias correction and so-called  ghost stations . I think it's good to show what's actually going on with the graphs they present as "proof" of data manipulation, though. I think it can be easily demonstrated here that it's actually Shewchuk and Heller that are tampering with data. Shewchuk (Top) and Correct (Below) Above are two graphs. The top graph shows what John Shewchuk claims shows that NOAA is manipulating data. It shows USHCN "raw" and "altered" Tmax data for 1900 to 2023. The bottom graph above is the correct plot of NOAA's published data from the current and correct dataset ( nClimDiv ) with a 5-year running mean to m...
Read more

Does NOAA have "Ghost Stations" for US Temperatures?

Image
The Epoch Times (ET) is a newspaper operated by the Falun Gong cult, formed in 1992. The cult has opposed the Chinese Communist Party, but recently it has made some inroads into the US politics, where it supports far-right political agendas; its ET newspaper has promoted a number of conspiracy theories involving QAnon, anti-vaccine propaganda, and climate science denial. In a recent " premium report ," the Epoch Times claims that the U.S. Temperature dataset operated by NOAA contains data from "non existent temperature stations" and asserts that there are "hundreds of ‘ghost’ climate stations" that are no longer operational, and data is just filled in from surrounding stations, with the implication that this is done to support Biden's climate policies. The tl;dr point here is that what the article calls "ghost stations" are actually just interpolated values used to calculate area-weighted means in an old dataset that NOAA no longer uses. The...
Read more

Was There a "Mike's Nature Trick" to "Hide the Decline?" Part 1 - Misreading CRU Emails

Image
In November 2009, someone likely stole[1] and publicly released over 1,000 emails from Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia. Following this, people combed through all these emails  looking for evidence of frauds and coverups on the part of climate scientists. They found very little damaging information, but not everything they found was was good. There were, as best I can tell, four categories of content that were discovered: The normal kinds of communication you'd expect to find in correspondence between scientists Words and phrases that were twisted out of context and redefined to support an imagined conspiracy that had been imposed on the emails. Evidence of mean-spirited attacks on contrarian scientists and heavy-handed tactics intended to punish journals that published contrarian studies.  A single email describing the process of creating a graph for a WMO statement that used the phrase "hide the decline."  Here I plan to tackle the "hid...
Read more