You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

drnickbone comments on Climate science: how it matters for understanding forecasting, materials I've read or plan to read, sources of potential bias - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: VipulNaik 07 July 2014 04:18PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (8)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: drnickbone 08 July 2014 07:24:21AM *  2 points [-]

Stephen McIntyre isn't a working climate scientist, but his criticism of Mann's statistical errors (which aren't necessarily relevant to the main arguments for AGW) have been acknowledged as essentially correct. I also took a reasonably detailed look at the specifics of the argument

Did you have a look at these responses? Or at Mann's book on the subject?

There are a number of points here, but the most compelling is that the statistical criticisms were simply irrelevant. Contrary to McIntyre and McKitrick's claims, the differences in principal component methodology make no difference to the proxy reconstructions. And the hockey stick graph has since been replicated dozens of times using multiple different proxies and methods, by multiple authors.