“According to the Copenhagen Diagnosis report, climate change has rapidly accelerated beyond all previous predictions and humans are to blame.”

What are they talking about ? I thought that we have not seen much temp rise ?

The program is made by Finnish reporter Martti Backman (the man who is sitting next to Steve McIntyre in the photo above).

Martti Backman has made several climate skeptical tv documentaries since 1997.

Backman’s “MOT: Cooling in the greenhouse” (MOT: Kylmää vettä kasvihuoneeseen) was made in 2008 which included interviews with NASA scientists Roy Spencer and John Christy. You can watch this documentary also on the web, just scroll down to the end of my message, there’s the link.

Watch MOT: Climate catastrophe cancelled (MOT: Ilmastokatastrofi peruutettu):

The program’s transcript in English:
http://ohjelmat.yle.fi/mot/arkisto/mot_ilmastokatastrofi_peruutettu/transcript_english

MOT’s full interview with MIT’s Richard Lindzen in English:
http://ohjelmat.yle.fi/mot/arkisto/mot_ilmastokatastrofi_peruutettu/richard_lindzen

Discussion thread about the program in English:
http://keskustelu.suomi24.fi/node/8637150

MOT: Cooling in the greenhouse (MOT: Kylmää vettä kasvihuoneeseen) Another climate skeptical tv documentary by Finnish reporter Martti Backman which includes interviews with NASA scientists Roy Spencer and John Christy. Watch the film for free:

http://yle.fi/elavaarkisto/?s=s&g=4&ag=28&t=501&a=6215

Program’s manuscript in English:
http://ohjelmat.yle.fi/mot/arkisto/29_9_2008_mot_kylmaa_vetta_kasvihuoneeseen/manuscript_english

MOT’s full interview with Roy W. Spencer (in English)
http://ohjelmat.yle.fi/mot/viikon_ohjelma/lisatietoa/roy_spencerin_haastattelu_huntsville_kesakuu_2008

MOT’s full interview with John Christy (in English)
http://ohjelmat.yle.fi/mot/viikon_ohjelma/lisatietoa/john_christyn_haastattelu_alabaman_yliopistolla_kesakuu_2008

According to my calculations, the impact of Upside Down Tiljander on the AD800 network (and medieval networks) is noticeable, notwithstanding the new corrected smudge graph. I provided code for my calculations. But let’s say that it “doesn’t matter”. This goes back to the first problem reported in our comment. If using 4 of 15 series upside down doesn’t “matter”, then this points to problems with the algorithm as it suggests that the algorithm is “too robust” – one of the problems with Mannian principal components was that they were similarly “too robust”.

I also suspect that Tingley and Huybers 2010? (the one reported by David Appell in Scientific American) used upside down Tiljander. They show the use of a Finnish sediment series (though not its identity). They used Rutherford Mann MXD series – maybe they used Mann 2008 sediment versions. If so, that would be another propagation. In this case, CA has probably prevented further spread of the infection, as Huybers is now aware of the problem and I doubt that the network so gushingly reported by Appell will ever see the light of day.

Hmmmm…. I just thought of something. Y’know, how I was wondering how they got a stick from a data set which mostly consisted of series with divergence problem. I wonder if they used Mann 2008 infilled MXD data.

Mann 08 had enough noodles in the spaghetti bowl.

Re: Tuomas Helin (#80),

Are you aware that Mann 08 chopped 60 years off the Schweingruber data and then regressed information from other proxies on the ends before screening? In fact data was ‘pasted’ on the ends of 90 percent of the proxies.

Before correlation screening.

Unprecedented.

Sure, it “doesn’t matter” … until you consider the propagation of the exact same error to Kaufman et al. 2009, where it did happen to “matter”.

Bender, it think it didn’t matter:
http://www.arcus.org/synthesis2k/synthesis/Correction_and_Clarification.pdf
.
Have a look on the Fig A and note the conclusion: “We thank those who have pointed out errors and have offered suggestions. The original conclusions of the paper have been strengthened as a result.”

it probably doesn’t have a big effect either way

Sure, it “doesn’t matter” … until you consider the propagation of the exact same error to Kaufman et al. 2009, where it did happen to “matter”.

The implications of this on climate science… that’s another story.

Mann’s response to MM PNAS tells a lot about the status of climate science. But the orientation of some proxies is minor issue when compared to MM hockey-stick-fine-tooth-saw:

Paleoclimate reconstructions are an application of multivariate calibration, which provides a theoretical basis for confidence interval calculation (e.g., refs. 2 and 3).

with refs

2. Osborne C (1991) Statistical calibration: A review. Int Stat Rev 59:309–336.
3. Brown PJ, Sundberg R (1987) Confidence and conflict in multivariate calibration. J R Stat Soc Ser B 49:46–57.

for which Mann replied

The method of uncertainty estimation (use of calibration/validation residuals) is conventional (3, 4) and was described explicitly in ref. 2 (also in ref. 5), and Matlab code is available at http://www.meteo.psu.edu/~mann/supplements/MultiproxyMeans07/code/codeveri/calc_error.m.

with conventional method references from 2004 and 2007. During 1960s there was some debate about these methods, but not anymore (outside climate science circles). Variance matching (who invented this, c’mon) and inverse calibration* estimators are biased towards calibration mean, and thus, when applied with Mann-smoothing and paint-instrumental-over-the-reconstruction, hockey stick generators.

*) reverse the roles of response and explanatory variables

This is from Mann’s SI, if you search for tiljander in the excel spreadsheet you quickly jump to the stats for the four proxies. Scroll to the right and you can see all have a positive correlation to a warming temperature. Of course that means they also have an upslope in the original format.

That correlation is 0.2987 , and you can check with corresponding d2 from propick.m :

[year d2]

1850 1.0922 -1.4572
1851 1.3208 -1.2274
1852 1.0922 -1.1482
1853 1.6002 -0.51156
1854 1.7526 -0.49734
1855 1.2192 -1.216
1856 0.6096 -2.2499
1857 1.9812 -0.76405
1858 1.143 0.47738
1859 1.0668 0.36646
1860 1.8034 -1.0836
1861 0.8636 -0.55584
1862 1.1176 -1.9328
1863 0.6858 1.1522
1864 1.1684 -1.2138
1865 1.0414 -0.86183
1866 0.9144 -0.85892
1867 1.1684 -2.1041
1868 1.0414 -0.53199
1869 0.9906 -0.89076
1870 1.4732 -0.29929
1871 1.4732 -2.675
1872 1.1684 0.19962
1873 1.2192 0.076474
1874 0.8382 0.071739
1875 1.397 -1.5356
1876 1.3462 -1.2066
1877 1.1684 -1.5675
1878 1.0414 0.52042
1879 0.6096 -0.71574
1880 1.0414 -0.21971
1881 0.9144 -1.878
1882 1.4478 0.80319
1883 1.2192 0.61104
1884 1.4732 0.44389
1885 1.524 -0.74608
1886 1.4478 0.0099736
1887 1.778 0.49137
1888 1.0668 -1.5678
1889 1.143 -0.040843
1890 1.2446 0.66045
1891 1.143 0.31764
1892 1.2446 -1.2289
1893 1.397 -1.4473
1894 1.397 1.0896
1895 1.3462 -0.49265
1896 1.5748 0.85459
1897 1.1938 0.37201
1898 1.4224 -0.036684
1899 1.27 -1.2456
1900 1.6256 -1.0428
1901 0.9144 0.38717
1902 1.3462 -1.7417
1903 1.9304 0.57666
1904 1.0668 -0.96112
1905 1.0414 0.12758
1906 0.8382 0.3119
1907 1.1938 -0.847
1908 1.397 -0.20735
1909 0.889 -0.29261
1910 1.6002 0.84604
1911 1.4986 -0.17242
1912 1.1684 -0.44829
1913 1.0922 0.58053
1914 1.0414 0.75991
1915 1.4224 -1.896
1916 0.8128 -0.36386
1917 1.4986 -0.57638
1918 0.9398 0.16598
1919 1.1938 -0.12523
1920 1.1938 0.51527
1921 1.1176 -0.089346
1922 0.8636 -0.618
1923 0.9398 -0.74207
1924 1.3716 0.10228
1925 0.889 0.018636
1926 0.9652 -0.65591
1927 1.2446 -0.45814
1928 1.6256 -0.91268
1929 1.2954 -0.38288
1930 6.6548 0.43051
1931 2.7178 -0.52334
1932 1.9558 0.42923
1933 2.3876 -0.31368
1934 2.159 0.83213
1935 1.651 0.045914
1936 1.8034 0.24709
1937 1.397 0.82969
1938 1.6002 0.95399
1939 1.8542 0.18203
1940 0.9652 -0.61959
1941 1.3716 -1.4313
1942 0.9144 -1.1156
1943 1.4986 0.53724
1944 1.7526 0.22287
1945 1.4732 -0.22805
1946 1.7526 0.20313
1947 1.4478 -0.36512
1948 1.8796 0.67629
1949 1.8796 1.5169
1950 1.6256 0.57403
1951 1.2954 0.30792
1952 1.651 -0.16282
1953 1.7526 1.2272
1954 1.9812 1.6263
1955 2.413 1.2087
1956 1.8288 1.2123
1957 1.6764 1.5905
1958 1.778 1.5112
1959 0.9144 2.1149
1960 1.6764 1.8353
1961 1.016 2.0945
1962 3.5052 1.2212
1963 2.8194 1.9556
1964 2.0828 1.6279
1965 2.6924 1.3926
1966 2.9464 1.8842
1967 6.731 2.1616
1968 3.3528 1.9596
1969 2.413 2.0269
1970 2.6416 1.8192
1971 3.0226 1.1591
1972 3.048 0.51173
1973 3.3528 0.27431
1974 3.6068 0.56568
1975 2.5654 0.56177
1976 5.2324 -0.65328
1977 2.8702 -0.60739
1978 2.4892 -0.7013
1979 2.9972 -0.37891
1980 4.572 -0.14424
1981 4.1148 -0.42308
1982 3.7846 0.074207
1983 5.6134 0.2563
1984 4.826 0.44146
1985 3.0988 -0.6406
1986 3.5573 -0.34258
1987 3.0015 -0.94103
1988 3.5637 0.29404
1989 2.7887 0.64846
1990 2.634 0.47761
1991 2.9224 0.44367
1992 2.5285 0.55607
1993 2.1654 -0.28457
1994 2.7139 0.27886
1995 2.6034 0.50682

Exact match, now you’ll need to check the peaks in 2nd column to verify that the orientation is as in Mann SuppInfo.pdf S8. Just in case, check also that temperature (3rd column) is not flipped, year 1941 is a good one to check that, that was quite cold around here ( http://www.fmi.fi/kuvat/vuosikeskilampop04.png )