all 5 comments

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

A recent paper looked at communication of current reproductions of the original MBH (1998) paper that was the original hockey stick.

In light of climate skeptics here revisiting some old lies about it, I thought it the reminder of how well it is reproduced over the recent decade might be valuable.

Earlier this year Dr Michael Mann won $1M in a lawsuit against conservative writers who said his work was ‘fraudulent’ and that he ‘molested and tortured’ data.

“Today’s verdict vindicates Mike Mann’s good name and reputation. It also is a big victory for truth and scientists everywhere who dedicate their lives answering vital scientific questions impacting human health and the planet.”

People who were following the science at the time will recall how much he was backed by the science and attacked by a group of people funded by fossil fuel interests.

Academy affirms hockey-stick graph

But it is still being reproduced today as more and more proxy data becomes available.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

the law always has justice prevail IRL everybody knows that

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

In this case the law affirms Dr Mann's work, and the science keeps reproducing it, with more and more precision.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

does it

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yep.

The paper in the top comment has the reconstructions done since 2013 that are graphed in the original post.

And the global ones are very much hockey stick shaped.