Black Knights Matter, and spatter. Let me give you a hand up, Phil; oops, it's your own hand.
===============

kim, the unprecedented disaster of Gergis, is just a flesh wound to Climate Scientists. As long as it is worth their while financially, they know their best interest remains lying.

If you can add or remove a proxy series without fear of any consequences to the result, why not remove them all?

EM. Can I believe my eyes? I couldn't put it more simply myself.

EternalOptimist, without dodgy proxy data, the signal of adjustments by climate scientists, would not be detectable in fabricated records of temperature.

in that case GC, If you can add any old proxy series without fear of any consequences to the result, why not add as many as you can find?

why stop at 20? why not add a million proxy series?

and if laughing boy comes back and tells me that some of them would not fit, then the extra one that was added was clearly selected because it did fit.

which is fraudulent

EternalOptimist, the more proxies there are, the easier it is for climate scientists to select those that record what was required, by those that funded the climate scientists.

The onus is on those that produce proxies, to produce proxies that climate scientists want, not proxies that will be discarded.

Fabrication of proxies is another highly skilled micro industry that depends on the Globe Warming. Which is a curious conflict of interest.

Martin A. Vuja de means having an experience again but not recognizing it. In this context it would be reading Gergis et al 2016, expecting it to be like Gergis et al 2014 but finding it without fault.

I believe experiencing deja vu more than once is deja tu.

You must realize there are two types of climate proxy which should never be used together.
Proximal climate proxies are those that are closest to what you wish to prove. They should be used before, during and after any analysis and are characterized by their hockey stick appearance. They can be found or manufactured everywhere, except apparently in mainland Australia.

In contrast, poxy climate proxies reveal inconviencies, and should be tortured or better still ignored. Unfortunately they are also ubiquitous, including Australia. Poxy proxies can sometimes be made proximal by making them prescient, by one year today but, who knows, perhaps trees can forecast by a decade or more. Most Medieval history is poxy.

The two types can be separated using Josh's 2012 sieve.

Josh could we could have a deja vu?, your cartoon still applies.

Gergis et al 2016 is a reGergisation of Gergis et al. 2012 and is still vomit.

Those who believe science should be devoid of beliefs, haven't practiced doing it.
Aug 5, 2016 at 3:06 PM | Unregistered CommenterACK

"science" as in "social science", "domestic science", "political science", "climate science" I take it.

Belief is a subjective thing.

Martin A. Not at all. Try reading my Aug 5 post again. Belief is an essential part of the hardest of sciences. Until the Higgs boson was confirmed it was pure belief. Now its dark energy and matter that are believed by some, disbelieved by others.

And such is the human condition, to be beset by these notions in the brain. My cat has never lost any sleep pondering dark energy. In fact he slept just as much before higgs as afterwards. There are eternal verities out there, whether you believe, disbelieve or sleep right through it, does it matter ?

I suppose if the policies that follow from beliefs increase unhappiness and cause damage then it does matter. And that is why I will oppose laughing boy and his ilk. They cause real harm

Eternal Optimist

I always believed cats were pure mathematicians. Dogs on the other hand are social engineers. Both dream violently, so must worry.

Hilary Ostrov. Suggesting cats are pure mathematicians was meant as no slur. Far from it, it was intended to illustrate their self belief in their overwhelming superiority, especially when they gaze down upon us through sleepy eyes from the lofty heights to which they have climbed. Most are also superb applied mathematicians, calculating everything to their advantage. It is clear that they rule.

On the other hand, as companions and helpmates, trained dogs are near perfection. Dogs are the only reason I am an agnostic, rather than an atheist. Almost I could believe in intelligent design.

I have no intention of stoking up cat-dog wars. I have been owned by both.

MartinA. You are quibbling over words. Yes beliefs are different from speculations and hypotheses. But to move speculations/hypotheses forward an investigator has to have some belief that what is being pursued has a moderate chance of surviving challanges that might be thrown at it (i.e. be scientific "truth"). Otherwise, why bother? Yes the words have different meanings but there's scarcely a fagpaper between them.

Martin A. I was talking about science in general. You made a statement about a particular and specific aspect of science, but made the wider point that "if it's 'belief' it isn't science". Such a statement applies to all science, and it is wrong. My August 5 post refuted your statement in general terms. But if you want to be specific, so be it.

It must be concluded that those using proxies believe in them. They think they allow meaningful conclusions to be made. There is little difference between a palaeoclimatologist's believe in the validity of the proxies they use and an astronomer's belief in dark matter. Both have opponents who offer counter argument/data, which they ignore. If you argue that the worst palaeoclimatologists are not following scientific procedures, I recommend you read a book I recommended to golf Charlie - Fabulous Science by John Waller. In it you will find that pillars of the scientific establishment engaged in some very dubious practices. They did this because they BELIEVED they knew what the truth was and doctored evidence to fit. They were fortunate because their beliefs turned out to be correct.

There is an awful lot of mythologizing about science and homage paid to the "false god" of the scientific method. The more I practiced science myself and the more biographies of scientists I have read the more I have realized that science involves darker forces than I originally thought. Please note that I am not condoning bad practice in science and when it is identified it should be rooted out. This is why I have tried so hard to illustrate the shenanigans surrounding publication of the PAGES2K 2013 paper in this discussion thread.

Heh folks did you know
In climate circles
Australasia has expanded so?

Vostok, Java and Fiji
now included
in a tortured geography.

Tis' a wonder that Gergis et al did not include records from the latest Eurovision Song Contest venue.

Singer beneath bridges

ACK, the Eurovision Song Contest may not be predetermined in terms of a clear winner, but politics and money do play a big part. Slurring the Eurovision Song Contest by comparing it to Climate Science's best efforts at re-adjusting history, is a bit unfair.

I am amazed that no one has yet linked the colour change of the Olympic Diving Pool to Ocean Acidification, or was it just another Greenpeace publicity stunt gone wrong having failed to daub Green slogans on Christ the Redeemer?

golfCharlie, It is suspected that the coloration of the pool was accomplished to prevent the Chinese synchronized swimming team achieve goldness and was done by a GREAT power. Whether done by application of GM cyanobacteria or chemical warfare is not known. Investigations are ongoing and will be reported soon. But don't hold your breath, except in the pool!

Phil dove in the deep end, and it keeps getting deeper and deeper and deeper. Will he ever surface to hear the plaudits or to 'Read' all about it?
=================

golfCharlie. Me slur the Eurovision Song Contest? - Sacre blue non! It was the attempt by Australian climate mandarins to assume sovereignty over vast tracts of other peoples' lands that concerned me. Clearly Law Dome is not part of Australasia; only bits that warmed over the last 30 years need apply for climate citizenship.