climate hockey stick defeated

way 2 go

Well-known member
Dr. Tim Ball Defeats Michael Mann s Hockey Stick Climate Lawsuit

The Supreme Court of British Columbia has dismissed Dr. Michael Mann s defamation lawsuit against skeptical Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball. Full legal costs were awarded to Dr. Ball, the defendant in the case.

Indeed, not just a fawning MSM, but many hundreds of subsequent climate studies have relied on Mann ??s findings. Mann ??s reputation was such, that most climate researchers merely accepted his graph, a typical example of groupthink.

Dr. Ball has long warned that if the world was permitted to see behind the secrecy they would be shocked at just how corrupt and self-serving are those ??scientists at the forefront of man-made global warming propaganda.

As anyone can tell by contrasting and comparing the graphs below (Ball s version top, Mann ??s below) it is obvious there exists a massive discrepancy in the findings.

link

mann-ball-graphs.jpg
 
Last edited:

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
I wonder how many people caught the fraud here. The charts show two different scales, making any comparison between them meaningless. And while "Michael Mann's version" has a consistent scaling, "Tim Ball's version" has less distance from 0 to 9.0 than there is between 9.0 and 9.5.

And deniers wonder why people assume they are all liars. Here's some data from three different studies on global tempertures over that period:

Marcott_PAGES2k.png


Looks a lot different if you don't distort the scales, doesn't it?

Here's one that includes Mann's work, but without and distortion to exaggerate it:
iu


So Mann isn't the culprit here. This graph hints at what Ball was up to:
page1-795px-T_comp_61-90.pdf.jpg

Green dots show the 30-year average of the new PAGES 2k reconstruction. The red curve shows the global mean temperature, according HadCRUT4 data from 1850 onwards. In blue is the original hockey stick of Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1999 ) with its uncertainty range (light blue).

It seems that Ball cherry-picked where, within the range of uncertainty, he wanted the curve in different periods.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
I wonder how many people caught the fraud here. The charts show two different scales, making any comparison between them meaningless. And while "Michael Mann's version" has a consistent scaling, "Tim Ball's version" has less distance from 0 to 9.0 than there is between 9.0 and 9.5.

And deniers wonder why people assume they are all liars. Here's some data from three different studies on global tempertures over that period:

Marcott_PAGES2k.png


Looks a lot different if you don't distort the scales, doesn't it?

Here's one that includes Mann's work, but without and distortion to exaggerate it:
iu


So Mann isn't the culprit here. This graph hints at what Ball was up to:
page1-795px-T_comp_61-90.pdf.jpg

Green dots show the 30-year average of the new PAGES 2k reconstruction. The red curve shows the global mean temperature, according HadCRUT4 data from 1850 onwards. In blue is the original hockey stick of Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1999 ) with its uncertainty range (light blue).

It seems that Ball cherry-picked where, within the range of uncertainty, he wanted the curve in different periods.
Poor Barbie.

Making comments on the pictures rather than the content of the post they're included in.

Try reading the post for once.

It's not about the pictures. It's about a court case where Ball challenged Mann, Mann sued for defamation, Ball requested data, and Mann failed to provide it, and so Mann's case against Ball was rejected.
 
Last edited:

User Name

Greatest poster ever
As anyone can tell by contrasting and comparing the graphs below (Ball’s version top, Mann’s below) it is obvious there exists a massive discrepancy in the findings.

"Tim Ball & his supporters have been promoting a (A) FAKE version of a 1990 #IPCC graph that (B) only represented one locality (central England) and (C) was only ever meant to be schematic illustration (rather than a quantitative reconstruction) of temperature." -- https://twitter.com/MichaelEMann/status/1168741432217264130
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
Poor Barbie.

Making comments on the pictures rather than the content of the post they're included in.

(JR regards facts the way a vampire regards a crucifix)

It's not about the pictures. It's about a court case where Ball challenged Mann, Mann sued for defamation, Ball requested data, and Mann failed to provide it, and so Mann's case against Ball was rejected.

Don't care about the lawyer kerfuffle. I'm just pointing out the dishonesty of whoever rigged up that faked graph. And I showed some graphs of the actual data without distorted scales and faked values.

If Ball got away with whatever he did, good for him. I'm just showing his (or whoever made that graph) dishonesty. My wife's brother is a lawyer, as is one of my sons. They tell me it's not about justice. So maybe that explains things.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Yeah. Lawyers hate justice (mostly because if there were justice in their system, they would be convicted of half of everything in the trials they are involved in).

You were schooled by TH in that type of ignorance and yet you keep perpetuating it as if it's a badge of honour?

Why?

:freak:
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Yeah. Lawyers hate justice (mostly because if there were justice in their system, they would be convicted of half of everything in the trials they are involved in).

well, it's worth remembering that lawyers are motivated by money

justice isn't in the equation at all
 

eider

Well-known member
Dr Ball. Dr Mann.......... which doctor is right?
Is the climate changing?
Are the world's glaciers retreating?
Is the Greenland ice-cap melting?
Is Arctic ice reducing?
Is the Antarctic shedding more massive bergs than in past decades?

All I know is that billions of pounds have been spent on building new sea walls along all of the low-lying UK shorelines, and billions of tons of shingle have been dropped along our beaches in order to reduce wave impact on cliffs and sea defences. The new walls where I live are very very impressive! Very expensive!

Researchers had been predicting a One meter rise in sea level this century, but now they seem to be raising that estimate towards 2 meters.

Tell you what........ those who wish to can take their thrones down to the sea shore! A brilliant investment these people would be to buy up all the low lying properties as their values reduce..... what a nice little earner for them...... if nothing changes.

But just you watch the sea levels, and if the majority of climate researchers are right, just you watch the denialists as they try to claim that they always believed that it would happen.

Dr Mann? Dr Ball? Let them argue away........ in the UK we are moving now. Actions speak louder than words.
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Is the climate changing?

always has been, always will be

google "doggerland" for some perspective

Are the world's glaciers retreating?
Is the Greenland ice-cap melting?
Is Arctic ice reducing?
Is the Antarctic shedding more massive bergs than in past decades?

what, you think we should live in an ice age?

All I know is that billions of pounds have been spent on building new sea walls along all of the low-lying UK shorelines, and billions of tons of shingle have been dropped along our beaches in order to reduce wave impact on cliffs and sea defences. The new walls where I live are very very impressive! Very expensive!

congratulations, sucker :chuckle:

Researchers had been predicting a One meter rise in sea level this century, but now they seem to be raising that estimate towards 2 meters.

in other words, their predictions are unreliable
 
Top