Maybe that’s not a good thermometer

Posted · 1 Comment

Those of you with even a passing interest in the scaremongering over carbon dioxide levels will remember the climategate “trick” to hide the decline. Basically, scientist Keith Briffa stopped using bristlecone pine tree rings as climate “thermometers” after 1960 because while we know from real thermometers temperatures were going up, his bristlecone pines started showing temperatures going down.

In real science, this might cause one to question whether those tree rings truly measure temperature or whether they measure something else—like rainfall.

Instead, what Briffa and his colleagues did was to simply stop charting his pine trees on temperature graphs and then added in real temperatures to the graph making it appear that there was unanimity between their derived temperature sources and the real thing. Until this past week, the skeptic community had focused exclusively on the divergence occurring since 1960. It turns out another divergence was discovered by the irreplaceable Steve McIntyre this week. It turns out that Briffa not only deleted data from 1960 onward because it conflicted with the alarmists’ carefully constructed narrative. Briffa also deleted nearly 200 years of data from about 1400 to the late 1500s because it doesn’t match up with either.


And we’re supposed to drastically change our economies, spend trillions of dollars and continue to keep people in the developing world impoverished based upon this “science?”

A movie was made about the alarmists called “Not evil, just wrong.” There’s got to be some point where the dishonesty becomes so egregious and willful that it passes the “wrong” line into “evil” territory.

Are we there yet?

One Response to "Maybe that’s not a good thermometer"
  1. Rachel says:

    Just remember, the “science” is “settled.”

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: