Take 1-sigma and 2-sigma envelopes of all 10 reconstructions (*1). At given year go through all temperatures, and count scores. If given temperature is only within one 2-sigma envelope, lightest color is used (0..10), as the score is 5. If temperature does not touch any of those envelopes, no points, and color will be white. Within 1-sigma envelope, they’ll give double points. Go through all points of the figure (y=temperature, x=year).

The problem is that this doesn’t explain the width of coloring from 1960-present. Maybe they heard me laughing when I saw MannJones2003, http://www.geocities.com/uc_edit/divergence.html

*1 Note that there are 12 reconstructions in Fig. 6.10 b …

One thing to note on Fig. 6.10 is the high top end of the envelope at ~AD990. I’ve commented on it several times now (based on other papers) and have yet to hear a single comment back. It seems to me the thouuuuuuusand year AD mark is itself cherry-picked. Warmers don’t want to talk about the potentially unprecedented trend AD910-990.

Finally, why are anomalies computed using the 1961-1990? Shouldn’t they be using the 1970-200 window, now that it is 2007? Isn’t that what we always used to do? Looks like the baseline might have been cherry-picked too.

Different picture, I’m puzzled by IPCC AR4 Ch 6 Fig 6.10, sorry for OT. Caption says

Overlap of the published multi-decadal time scale uncertainty ranges of all temperature reconstructions identified in Table 6.1 (except for RMO..2005 and PS2004), with temperatures within ⯱ standard error (SE) of a reconstruction scoring’ 10%, and regions within the 5 to 95% range scoring’ 5% (the maximum 100% is obtained only for temperatures that fall within ⯱ SE of all 10 reconstructions).

It’s not a confidence interval. Instead, it’s more of a confidence “envelope”, created as the:
“Overlap of the published multi-decadal time scale uncertainty ranges of all temperature reconstructions identified in Table 6.1′€³
It’s probably the overlap that makes it so wide.

And yet Crowley and Lowrey (orange) goes outside all the envelopes in the 1800s. Does that mean it’s not in Table 6.1, and if not, why is it shown graphically?

You might want to start by looking at the page linked in the left-hand margin second box, “Common Acronyms used on This Blog” or CATB if you prefer. (The alternative title, “Common Acronyms of Climate Audit” unfortunately has an Acronym, CACA, which would be too enthusiastically adopted by certain resident trolls.)

can anyone explain 6.10 c uncertainties’, they seem to expand from 1960-present quite remarkably

It’s not a confidence interval. Instead, it’s more of a confidence “envelope”, created as the:
“Overlap of the published multi-decadal time scale uncertainty ranges of all temperature reconstructions identified in Table 6.1″
It’s probably the overlap that makes it so wide.