No joke - Josh 211

The Marcott FAQ at Real Climate has been causing comment over the Easter weekend, particularly at Climate Audit. Roger Pielke Jr also has an excellent post, aptly titled Fixing the Marcott Mess in Climate Science.

Roger writes in the comments:

"There are a few bad eggs, with the Real Climate mafia being among them, who are exploiting climate science for personal and political gain. Makes the whole effort look bad."

H/t to Anthony at WUWT for requesting this cartoon.

Posted by Josh

Comments

[Sam]

Mann looks like Rob Halford

[Bruce Friesen]

Entropic Man says "I dont insist you use Marcott et al. If you seek to falsify my point there are lots of other proxies out there"

More progress! We can now agree the work by Marcott et al is not a useful source of information on temperature rates of change for periods less than 300 years.

I am not sure what your point is, or what relevance it has to this discussion (yes, I could guess at your point, but that also would be pointless).

The point of this discussion is the validity of Marcott et al paper/news release/interviews contrasting of current rates of change with the rates of change shown for periods up 11,300 years ago, drawing on their work. Their study. Can't be done.

[not banned yet]

Another one for you EM, this one courtesy of ctm posting at CA:

http://climateaudit.org/2013/04/02/april-fools-day-for-marcott-et-al/#comment-409622

http://imageshack.us/a/img404/7290/marcottvostok2.jpg

[Entropic man]

This was a local change lasting 6 years, with very little worldwide impact. I have in mind something more like the 0.8C rise this century, dropping back before it reaches the Shakun or Marcott detection threshold.If this is normal Holocene behaviour you should find a number of similar excursions.

Look in the ice cores and dendrochronology proxies. Som of them have 1 year resolution.