http://youtu.be/j5E9rarkh7g?t=11m

In this amazing video Michael admits to what hiding the decline is but then says that we "the well funded skeptics" are wrong for having a problem with it.

It actually had nothing to do with my work at all. "Hide the decline" was referring to a specific tree ring study of scientists in the U.K., in fact they had originally published that study in 1998 in Nature and what their study was about is something that's known as the "Divergence Problem" those particular tree ring data they were working with tracked temperatures very well up through about 1960 and for reasons scientists are still investigating and it may have to do with pollution and other factors those trees stopped tracking temperatures after 1960 and so in their original paper the main emphasis of that paper was on this problem with those type of tree ring data the so called divergence problem and they were very specific in that paper about how those tree ring data should not be used after 1960 because of that decline in the response to temperature. So in that particular email Phil Jones was talking about how he didn't want to show the bad part of that curve the after 1960 part of that particular tree ring data set because its misleading because its well known that it doesn't represent temperature after 1960.

You know these are just two very good examples of a much more general phenomenon its very easy to pick through emails and take swords and phrases out of context and completely misrepresent what people are talking about.

Basically he's saying it's fine to only use the data that supports your theory and hide the data that doesn't.

I am still waiting for my check from the Koch Brothers by the way.

• Prev
• Next