The Climate Flat-Earthers, the warming zealots who refuse to acknowledge any observation that contradicts the dogma of their pseudo-scientific faith, were recently busted again. This time it was Shaun Marcott who lied, accepted accolades for his lie, promoted the lie, and after getting caught backed off quietly, knowing that the same media that over-sold his lie would never over-sell the truth.
Marcott’s fame–the lie–resulted from data he presented as proof that in the past 100 years the earth temperature had risen dramatically. This is Marcott’s own fabrication of the debunked Mann Hockey-stick fraud that used-climate-salesman Al Gwhore sold (and continues to sell) to accumulate his now vast-fortune. Marcott’s sudden fame was his own undoing.
Check out the media coverage he basked in before the truth was revealed.
* “We’re screwed: 11,000 years’ worth of climate data prove it.” The Atlantic, March 10.
* “The modern rise that has recreated the temperatures of 5,000 years ago is occurring at an exceedingly rapid clip on a geological time scale, appearing in graphs in the new paper as a sharp vertical spike.” Justin Gillis, New York Times, March 7.
* “’Rapid’ head spike unlike anything in 11,000 years. Research released Thursday in the journal Science uses fossils of tiny marine organisms to reconstruct global temperatures…. It shows how the glode for several thousands of years was cooling until an unprecedented reversal in the 20th century.” The Associated Press, March 7.
Marcott himself speaks…
What we’ve found is that temperatures increased in the last hundred years as much as they had cooled in the last six or seven thousand. In other words, the rate of change is much greater than anything we’ve seen in the whole Holocene.
So there you have it. It has to be modern man. It has to be human emissions and the industrial culture. What else could explain this leap in warming since the 20th century began? How about intentional deception and outright fraud?
Marcott lied. His science paper data is drawn from his own PhD thesis at Oregon State University, but his thesis does not show the warming spike.
Ross McKitrick, Financial Post, c/o Powerline (linked above) (emphasis mine)
The new, and startling, feature of the Marcott graph was at the very end: Their data showed a remarkable uptick that implied that, during the 20th century, our climate swung from nearly the coldest conditions over the past 11,500 years to nearly the warmest. Specifically, their analysis showed that in under 100 years we’ve had more warming than previously took thousands of years to occur, in the process undoing 5,000 years’ worth of cooling.
This uptick became the focus of considerable excitement, as well as scrutiny. One of the first questions was how it was derived. Marcott had finished his PhD thesis at Oregon State University in 2011 and his dissertation is online. The Science paper is derived from the fourth chapter, which uses the same 73 proxy records and seemingly identical methods. But there is no uptick in that chart, nor does the abstract to his thesis mention such a finding.
Stephen McIntyre of climateaudit.org began examining the details of the Marcott et al. work, and by March 16 he had made a remarkable discovery. The 73 proxies were all collected by previous researchers, of which 31 are derived from alkenones, an organic compound produced by phytoplankton that settles in layers on ocean floors, and has chemical properties that correlate to temperature. …
According to the scientists who originally published the alkenone series, the core tops varied in age from nearly the present to over a thousand years ago. Fewer than 10 of the original proxies had values for the 20th century. Had Marcott et al. used the end dates as calculated by the specialists who compiled the original data, there would have been no 20th-century uptick in their graph, as indeed was the case in Marcott’s PhD thesis.
Marcott’s 2011 thesis shows no uptick in warming. Marcott’s 2013 science paper–derived from his thesis–shows a significant warming trend right where the Climate-change flat-earthers need one to be.
Multiple reports followed, the internet lit up like a Co2-emitting-planet-Christmas Tree, and Marcott began quietly backing away…
[The] 20th-century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions.
Sorry I pistol whipped you buddy, here’s you wallet back?
So he has not–at least in this reporting–backed off any of the conclusions, just the data used to make them?
That’s what I call science.
Yes, we know all our data is flawed, and you keep catching us with cards up our sleeves, lying, hiding contradictory evidence, ignoring opposition research, but this is Science. We’re scientists. Experts. Trust us.
And there are those who will and do.
Much the way the 97% of “climate scientists” fraud continues to be invoked by the climate-change flat-earthers, the Marcott hockey stick is destined to resurface as often as necessary to ensure that the public continues to be misinformed by those who stand to gain the most from the ongoing misinformation campaign known as anthropogenic global warming.
Now move along. Nothing to see here.
Update- Mike Reminded me about something relevant that was covered (uncovered) last october.