Hide the decline

Once again we’re talking about air, you know that stuff that is Air: 7800 parts nitrogen, 2000 parts oxygen, 900 parts argon, and 4 itsy-bitsy parts CO2; that stuff that has gotten a fair bit cooler in the last decade or more. That stuff about which the enthusiasts of AGW say: Hide the Decline!

In suicide by chart, we saw that Michael Mann completely did away with the Mediaval Warm Period, a change so peculiar that it’s almost Freudian.

Now from the Telegraph: “There IS a problem with Global Warming. It stopped in 1998.” So the fellows from East Anglia have been working overtime to Hide the Decline, a subject we have treated at length here:

Pretty damning stuff from the East Anglia computer models courtesy of small dead animals:

./harris-tree/briffa_sep98_e.pro:7:;****** APPLIES A VERY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION FOR DECLINE*********
./harris-tree/briffa_sep98_e.pro:55:; APPLY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION
./harris-tree/briffa_sep98_e.pro:83:; APPLY ARTIFICIAL CORRECTION
Binary file ./krbfshi2.doc matches
./osborn-tree6/mann/abdlowfreq2grid.pro:13:; version has already been artificially adjusted to reproduce the largest
./osborn-tree6/mann/mxdgrid2ascii.pro:103: printf,1,’NOTE: recent decline in tree-ring density has been ARTIFICIALLY’
./osborn-tree6/mann/obsj04_f7.pro:15:; version has already been artificially adjusted to reproduce the largest
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/calibrate_correctmxd.pro:5:; artificially removed (i.e. corrected) the decline in this calibrated
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/data4sweden.pro:67:printf,1,’this “decline” has been artificially removed in an ad-hoc way, and’
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/hovmueller_lon.pro:4:; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/maps1.pro:5:; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/maps12.pro:5:; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/maps15.pro:5:; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/maps1_movie.pro:5:; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/maps1_poster.pro:5:; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/maps24.pro:5:; plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/maps_general.pro:6:; shouldn’t usually plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/data4alps.pro:74:printf,1,’this “decline” has been artificially removed in an ad-hoc way, and’
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/pl_calibmxd4.pro:5:; artificially high for the calibration period, but are fine for the
./osborn-tree6/summer_modes/pl_decline.pro:300:; Now apply a completely artificial adjustment for the decline

Most amusing comment from one of the disgraced scientists: “The use of the term ‘hiding the decline’ was in an email written in haste.”

The process of getting to this level of corruption in falsifying data to prove AGW probably proceeded in several stages. Scientists used to admit that their climate models were crude, but at least there was probably some warming to detect. As there grew to be more money and more glory in global warming alarmism, the temptation to doctor data only increased. Since skeptics were marginalized, those fudging the numbers became ever bolder. Finally, the last 10 years of global cooling have created a problem that made something like the East Anglia scandal seem inevitable in retrospect.

We continue to wonder how and to what degree the elites who are so invested in the superstition of AGW will come to realize their mistake. Will they have a Thomas Kuhn moment? (HT: Powerline)

Leave a Reply