Midwest Chick's Place

12 responses to “Michael Mann’s hockey stick, finally where it belongs”

1. 

   dearieme

   January 30, 2026 at 7:10 am

   An error of only two orders of magnitude is probably pretty good for a Global Boiling fanatic.

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply
2. 

   geophysicist

   January 30, 2026 at 7:17 am

   The damage that person did to the nation and world with his rantings about climate would be almost impossible to correct. Even today – disgraced as he may have been – his claims have influenced politics and finance in ways most would find hard to believe.

   LikeLike

   Reply
3. 

   Unferth

   January 30, 2026 at 8:36 am

   My father worked for the EPA as a statistician. He was convinced that man-made global warming was pure nonsense. Why? Because of how incompetent the environmentalists at the EPA were at statistics and running quality tests.

   The typical scenario was that an environmentalist would come up with an idea for a test. They would develop how they were going to do it, and possibly actually start the experiment. At some point they had to run it by a statistician to see if the results were statistically significant or just worthless data.

   My dad would review the approach, point out how the test needed to be modified in order to be statistically valid, and try to help the environmentalist to do quality science. Inevitably, the environmentalist would say, “Well, we’ve already gone so far down the path of doing it my way, we’ll just do it my way.”

   The study would be concluded, stamped with “EPA study says”, but underneath it was all statistically meaningless garbage.

   LikeLike

   Reply
4. 

   TRoy

   January 30, 2026 at 8:58 am

   Being out of touch with reality seems to be a communicable disease for the Statists and environmental “experts”. It trickles down to some of the common folk who make no effort to discern truth from lies, readily accepting whatever latest crusade happens to be popular.

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. 

   Nemo

   January 30, 2026 at 9:05 am

   …and let’s not forget that the models they use to develop what the climate is going to look like 50-100 years from now are they same ones they use to give us the 10 day weather forecast which is wrong 30-40% of the time. They just run the models for a longer period of time.

   Let’s also not forget that these so called “climate scientists” were caught red handed altering the input data to get the outcome IPCC wanted. Otherwise, their funding would have been cut off.

   Then there’s the other abuses like locating weather reporting stations in the middle of a hot top parking lot or next to a building’s air conditioning heat exchanger.

   The thing that really slays me about this whole fiasco is the “climate scientists” made no reference or account for Milankovitch cycles in their models or research or that we’ve just past the peak of the current cycle and, according research in other areas like tree ring data and ocean and fresh water sediment studies, are headed on the down slope of an 11000 year cooling cycle.

   That cooling, if comparable to past cycles, will put us in another ice age in a couple thousand years and there’s no amount of money that can prevent it.

   LikeLike

   Reply
6. 

   jess

   January 30, 2026 at 9:11 am

   The hype works. It’s not uncommon for me to hear someone say how it’s much warmer today, or they’ve never seen it this cold. The weather is extreme (in their opinion) because humans have somehow done more to the atmosphere than the sun, and volcanoes. I’ve found my efforts to tell many otherwise would be better wasted on talking to a tree.

   LikeLike

   Reply
7. 

   CL

   January 30, 2026 at 9:43 am

   Reading . .. reading . . . Oh. I thought i was going to find his fabled hockey stick was up his ass.

   Where it belongs.

   LikeLike

   Reply
8. 

   Madam DeFarge

   January 30, 2026 at 12:06 pm

   Snake oil salesmen have never disappeared, just took the oil out of it. Here is to hoping he never has a nice again.

   LikeLike

   Reply
9. 

   Vance

   January 30, 2026 at 1:54 pm

   So the climate “scientists” say that mankind has influenced the climate and only by giving the “scientists” and their lackeys in government tens of trillions can “Bad outcome X!” be prevented.

   How, exactly, is any of this different than the local priest of Enlil or Baal saying the crops will fail unless you give him, the priest, your nubile young daughter and half of your money to prevent the bad harvest?

   But sure, I believe that mankind can influence the climate. How? By provoking God to either punish or reward us somehow. God controls the climate, and if we deserve a volcano or hurricane or nice weather, God will provide it.

   So instead of giving trillions to Michael Mann, why don’t we spend our time in prayer and repentance? Probably FAR more effective than the climate hoax people.

   LikeLike

   Reply
10. 

    Phil B

    January 30, 2026 at 5:44 pm

    There is also the “what if …” method of false data.

    “What if all the ice in Antarctica and Greenland melted?”. The scientists say “That won’t happen” and the response is “Well, no, but what if it did? Here’s money to do the calculations”.

    The report then says “IF (and it is a very big IF) all the ice melted then the sea level would rise 50 feet” (or whatever number you care to pluck out of the air) “but it won’t happen”.

    Followed by “OK, if the sea level did rise 50 feet what would be the result?”

    Then an essay saying that “These cities would be destroyed, the Mississippi valley would flood up to Ohio etc.”.

    They then publish the selected bits as a headline “Scientists say that the ice in Antarctica and Greenland will melt and all this disaster will result” without mentioning the warnings and qualifications.

    You can always tell when they are lying. Their lips move.

    LikeLike

    Reply
11. 

    Midwest Chick

    January 30, 2026 at 8:06 pm

    dearie–Indeed!

    geo–Very far reaching and no, there’s no way to calculate the harm he did.

    Unferth–Not surprised at all!

    TRoy–Exactly.

    Nemo–I’m still convinced that the Carter-era global cooling model is more accurate.

    jess–When they have nothing else to hype, there’s always the weather.

    CL–I kind of thought that having to pay out was the equivalent.

    Madam–Literally took the oil out.

    Vance–Not going to get into a holy war on this one, but your two examples are pretty similar.

    PhilB–True.

    LikeLike

    Reply
12. 

    Gerry

    January 31, 2026 at 1:22 pm

    I spent the last 5 years before I retired looking at sensor data from several dozen .gov nets. Some they maintained, some maintained by contractors. Program managers usually had only a few year work after grad school.

    It was apparent that few of the end users understood data quality assurance, significant numbers or minimum detection limits. They really didn’t care. Bad data was used as well as verified data if it served their purpose.

    The last great meeting was with an engineer said he calibrated a field unit on Day 1 and then ran the unit for 60 days. He reported in Zoom Meeting the instrument was +/- 25% and out of spec. I bit my tongue and said that was probably true BUT the SOP was to auto calibrate every day to compensate for sensor drift. He said no one told him that. I pointed out it was in his organization’s procedures and as well as the instrument manual. His boss pointed out no one told him to do that experiment. That shut him up

    I feel for Unferth’s dad

    LikeLike

    Reply