The Origin of the [Term] "Hockey Team"

William Connolley, who tends to be a little truth-challenged when it comes to matters Mc, said over at Fleck:

Incidentally, note that this “Hockey Team”stuff is a figment of McI’s.

Now I’ll admit to having some fun with this, but the term originated over at realclimate (and it wasn’t just an incidental use). I think that the first use of the term was on Jan. 27 here:

Rather, as demonstrated in IPCC(2001) [see this comparison here] and numerous additional studies since, it is what is perhaps more aptly termed the “Hockey Team”–that is, the multiple independent reconstructions and model simulations that now indicate essentially the same pattern of hemispheric mean temperature variation in past centuries, that support a “Hockey Stick” description of past temperature changes.

A few days later (and the blog had justed started), I said , having a little fun with forming lines, see the link.

Now it seems that we’re playing against an entire Hockey Team. First things first, what should the team be called: the Kyoto Flames? the IPCC Heat? the Blades? the Fever?
….
I’m a little worried about their skating skills. It looks like Mann can skate backwards, but what about Hughes? So many decisions, so little time.

A few weeks later on Feb 18, 2005, Schmidt and Ammann, used the term here:

The wider climate science context is discussed here, and the relationship to other recent reconstructions (the ‘Hockey Team’) can be seen here.

In Sept. 2005, they used the term again as follows:

So for this round at least, it looks like ‘Hockey Team: 2, MM: 0′.


25 Comments

  1. John A
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 3:33 PM | Permalink

    Don’t worry about Bill Connelley. Historical scholarship is a complete unknown foreign land to him.

  2. John A
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 4:50 PM | Permalink

    As far as a name for the Hockey Team, I now favor “The Kyoto Kibos”

  3. jae
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 5:05 PM | Permalink

    How about “The Spurious Spoofers?”

  4. Dave Dardinger
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 5:28 PM | Permalink

    I think they should be the ‘Proxies’. Their logo can be a Log section with “pro” in small letters on on side, “ies” on the other and a big red X right over the rings. And Mann is at Penn State now, isn’t he? So they can be PSP; the Penn State Proxies.

    While they’re at it, they can sell hockey pucks with a decal of the ring section pasted to it.

  5. Greg F
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 6:19 PM | Permalink

    If I may suggest some terminology.

    Freezing the Puck – Failure to disclose methods or data.

    Icing the puck — Way to avoid discussing problems with a reconstruction.
    Example: “We have moved on’.

    Hat Trick – Getting 3 or more papers published with the same rehashed non archived data.

    Line change – Rehashing the same tired data with different authors

    High Sticking – Penalty that results in your reconstruction not getting published. (Use of the Zamboni will usually make the paper publishable. See definition of Zamboni below).

    Cross Checking – Something the hockey team gets really upset about.

    Poke Check – Asking a science journal why the data is not archived.

    Power Play – Getting a letter from Congress.

    Shorthanded goal – The only way M&M are allowed to score.

    Zamboni – Statistical machine that removes all the peaks and valleys in the proxies.

    PS – John,
    Thanks for checking out the preview bug.

  6. gbalella
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 8:03 PM | Permalink

    The `Hockey Stick': A New Low in Climate Science

    Was written by John Daly 12 Nov 2000.

    See;

    http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm

  7. Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 8:13 PM | Permalink

    John Daly was a pioneer in a lot of ways. We remember him fondly. But I think the term being discussed is “Hockey Team”.

  8. Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 8:48 PM | Permalink

    Dear truth-challenged Steve, Connolley was not referring to the first use of the term, but to your conspiracy theories about the “Hockey Team”.

    You also use it with a different meaning.

  9. Paul
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 9:13 PM | Permalink

    Tim,

    I was going to write something pithy, but you left me speechless, dumbfounded for a retort.

    After all of the evidence that there is a Hockey Team, you act like Steve has delusions of consipracy? I don’t think there isn’t a more incestuous group of researches than the all-star hockey team. That’s not a conspiracy theory, that’s fact backed up by their own publications.

  10. Steve McIntyre
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 9:17 PM | Permalink

    Tim, Tim, Tim,…
    Here’s what Steve Bloom said in the next post:

    Re the “Hockey Team,” Mike did resort to the term on RC. I’m not sure if he’s the one that made it up, but in any case it was just a cute way of pointing out that numerous papers had drawn broadly similar conclusions.

    Steve Bloom was trying to help the challenged Connolley. I was just trying to help a little more. Always glad to help the challenged. But so much to do, so little time.

  11. Steve McIntyre
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 9:20 PM | Permalink

    BTW I’ve never suggested that there was a “conspiracy”. That would require a level of competence that I’ve not seen any evidence of.

  12. jae
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 9:26 PM | Permalink

    I put Steve Bloom in the same bin as Peter: they are simply unable or unwilling to engage in substantive issues; it is all innuendo and blame, which, when you think about it, shows their terrible insecurity. It isn’t worth the time and effort to reply. It’s like arguing with a Muslim about the killing the infidels. I quit discoursing with those that just want to pick a fight.

  13. Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 10:42 PM | Permalink

    Does this Tim Lambert have some sort of chip on his shoulder? Because the nature of his comment suggests he didn’t bother to read what he was commenting on before hitting that “Submit Comment” button.

    Anyway, thanks for this post. I was under the false impression Climate Audit had invented the “Hockey Team” label. Now I can see at least some of the Real Climate guys clearly identify themselves belonging to a group of researchers all publishing “hockey stick” type results.

    Keep up the good work.

  14. James Lane
    Posted Mar 7, 2006 at 12:53 AM | Permalink

    “Does this Tim Lambert have some sort of chip on his shoulder?”

    A chip? More like a timber mill.

  15. Kenneth Blumenfeld
    Posted Mar 7, 2006 at 12:59 AM | Permalink

    12:

    The irony!

  16. Posted Mar 7, 2006 at 5:48 AM | Permalink

    Actually Steve, you do think that it is a conspiracy. Can I suggest you call it the VHTC in future?

  17. John A
    Posted Mar 7, 2006 at 5:51 AM | Permalink

    Re: #16

    Do you really think that endlessly repeating a lie makes it true or even believeable?

  18. kim
    Posted Mar 7, 2006 at 6:29 AM | Permalink

    Well I think it is a conspiracy. Nothing else explains them being wrong together.
    ===================================================================================

  19. kim
    Posted Mar 7, 2006 at 6:33 AM | Permalink

    They’re breathing each other’s hot air.
    ================================

  20. jae
    Posted Mar 7, 2006 at 7:07 AM | Permalink

    They’re breathing each other’s hot air.
    ================================

    How true!

  21. Jeff Norman
    Posted Mar 7, 2006 at 7:37 AM | Permalink

    This is all rather lame, though I enjoyed Kenneth’s comment.

  22. Steve Sadlov
    Posted Mar 7, 2006 at 1:46 PM | Permalink

    RE: #12. It’s like the old KGB smear operations that were used to try and discredit the West in the eyes of the “non aligned world.”

  23. McCall
    Posted Mar 12, 2006 at 3:41 AM | Permalink

    re: 8 & 16
    Dr. Lambert-

    Any update on reviving the old Deltoid AGW threads, “Disinfo…cycle” for example? I’ve noticed you’ve made brief posts here, but you’ve posted little/no statistics, and no thermodynamics content at all.

    Reminder: nearly a month ago, you mentioned of an assistant that would be returning to work on this at Deltoid — a scienceblogs employee, I presumed?

  24. Posted Jul 16, 2011 at 6:28 PM | Permalink

    The link http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=23 now leads nowhere.

    Is the resource still curated on this site?

    • Steven Mosher
      Posted Jul 16, 2011 at 6:55 PM | Permalink

      that appears to be a reference to pre climategate re hosting.

3 Trackbacks

  1. […] speak out even in defense of others. This place could be full to bursting, such is the influence of the Hockey Team of reviewers and the carrot of climate-related […]

  2. […] speak out even in defense of others. This place could be full to bursting, such is the influence of the Hockey Team of reviewers and the carrot of climate-related […]

  3. […] speak out even in defense of others. This place could be full to bursting, such is the influence of the Hockey Team of reviewers and the carrot of climate-related […]

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,423 other followers

%d bloggers like this: