The Hockey Stick Illusion (Independent Minds)
und über 1,5 Millionen weitere Bücher verfügbar für Amazon Kindle. Erfahren Sie mehr
| |||||||||||||||
Wird oft zusammen gekauft
Produktinformation
|
Mehr über den Autor
Entdecken Sie Bücher, lesen Sie über Autoren und mehr
Welche anderen Artikel kaufen Kunden, nachdem sie diesen Artikel angesehen haben?
In diesem Buch
(Mehr dazu)
Ausgewählte Seiten ansehen
Buchdeckel | Copyright | Inhaltsverzeichnis | Auszug | Stichwortverzeichnis | Rückseite
Buchdeckel | Copyright | Inhaltsverzeichnis | Auszug | Stichwortverzeichnis | Rückseite
Kundenrezensionen
Die hilfreichsten Kundenrezensionen
11 von 11 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
Von sluning
Format:Taschenbuch
This book covers an interesting part of recent science history and reads like a thriller. I strongly recommend it to people who are unprejudiced and are interested in all sides of the climate change debate. Clearly, this book only covers the McIntyre & McKitrick side of the story and there would be a different interpretation and focus if friends of Mann et al. were to write their version of the events.
Despite this, the author A. W. Montford does a superb job in telling the story in a rather fair and transparent way, I think. The language always stays on the polite side, contrasting with some excessively aggressive communication styles in several well-known climate blogs. In this book one learns about the history of the hockey stick curve, how it supported the anthropogenic climate warming model, why it was needed and how it was put together. One learns the crucial role of statistics that can change the meaning of a whole dataset. We hear about suspicious tree ring datasets that have been used in the making of the hockeystick curve. Some of these datasets have been used by many authors as temperature proxies, even though these tree ring data might not always record temperature. We hear how hockeystick shapes can be generated out of random data. One wonders why data is not made openly available by the Hockey Team for independent checking of the results (something that normal reviewers cannot do due to time constraints). It might have to do with the fact that the resulting temperature curve failed the R2-statistical test which was considered as unimportant. We are also told that the alleged later "independent" confirmation of the Mann et al. temperature curve was carried out by a former PhD student of one of the original hockeystick authors (Bradley).
The book also describes how complicated it is to publish articles that are critical of the established model in peer-reviewed journals, when most of the editors and reviewers are proponents of the established model. We also learn about the strange way the IPCC has dealt with critical reviewer comments in the report compilation phase. How much independence is there if the key hockeystick curve authors are also made lead authors of IPCC chapters?
Regardless of what affiliation the reader might have, whether it is "sceptic" or "believer", at the end of the book one gets the impression that the climate sciences are in strong need of some new, powerful and independent quality control mechanisms in order to avoid any such conflicts in the future. Openness and transparency are key if the climate sciences want to regain trust. No scientific papers should be accepted if data & code are not archived and freely accessible. This book shows in an impressive manner how international science cooperation should NOT function. We can only hope that after the current scientific storm, a fresh and new start in the climate sciences is to be initiated. How much of the billions of dollars of international climate science funding is currently wasted with accusations and counter-accusations in blogs and emails and elsewhere? It is necessary to put an end to the black-and-white thinking and listen to valid criticism, such as that brought forward by Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick.
Despite this, the author A. W. Montford does a superb job in telling the story in a rather fair and transparent way, I think. The language always stays on the polite side, contrasting with some excessively aggressive communication styles in several well-known climate blogs. In this book one learns about the history of the hockey stick curve, how it supported the anthropogenic climate warming model, why it was needed and how it was put together. One learns the crucial role of statistics that can change the meaning of a whole dataset. We hear about suspicious tree ring datasets that have been used in the making of the hockeystick curve. Some of these datasets have been used by many authors as temperature proxies, even though these tree ring data might not always record temperature. We hear how hockeystick shapes can be generated out of random data. One wonders why data is not made openly available by the Hockey Team for independent checking of the results (something that normal reviewers cannot do due to time constraints). It might have to do with the fact that the resulting temperature curve failed the R2-statistical test which was considered as unimportant. We are also told that the alleged later "independent" confirmation of the Mann et al. temperature curve was carried out by a former PhD student of one of the original hockeystick authors (Bradley).
The book also describes how complicated it is to publish articles that are critical of the established model in peer-reviewed journals, when most of the editors and reviewers are proponents of the established model. We also learn about the strange way the IPCC has dealt with critical reviewer comments in the report compilation phase. How much independence is there if the key hockeystick curve authors are also made lead authors of IPCC chapters?
Regardless of what affiliation the reader might have, whether it is "sceptic" or "believer", at the end of the book one gets the impression that the climate sciences are in strong need of some new, powerful and independent quality control mechanisms in order to avoid any such conflicts in the future. Openness and transparency are key if the climate sciences want to regain trust. No scientific papers should be accepted if data & code are not archived and freely accessible. This book shows in an impressive manner how international science cooperation should NOT function. We can only hope that after the current scientific storm, a fresh and new start in the climate sciences is to be initiated. How much of the billions of dollars of international climate science funding is currently wasted with accusations and counter-accusations in blogs and emails and elsewhere? It is necessary to put an end to the black-and-white thinking and listen to valid criticism, such as that brought forward by Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick.
Die hilfreichsten Kundenrezensionen auf Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com:
4.5 von 5 Sternen
58 Rezensionen
227 von 288 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
5.0 von 5 Sternen
hockey story
25. Januar 2010
Von M. PHELPS
- Veröffentlicht auf Amazon.com
Format:Taschenbuch
This is a superb review of the story of the hockeystick, the temperature reconstruction which was supposed to show that late 20th century temperatures were unprecedented for at least 1,000 years and which was highlighted in the third IPCC report in 2001. What Montford does in this book is take us through Steven McIntyre's attempt to reproduce the original result of Michael Mann and the controversy that followed. His account is very well written and it reads like a detective story. The technical details of the debate are clearly explained even though there is no heavy mathematics or statistics. He tells the story chronologically and gives a good feel of what people on both sides of the debate actually said at the time (and there are plenty of references as well as judicious quotes from all sides). I have been following this debate for the past five years or so. To my mind this gives as clear an account of the debate as we are likely to see. What is now clear is that the Mann conclusions, far from being based on coherent evidence across a geographical widespread range of proxies all showing similar patterns across the Northern hemisphere, were based on a tiny subset of proxies, bristlecone and foxtail pines, from California whose anomalous 20th century growth was almost certainly not caused by high temperature. The apparently broad evidence was an illusion created by an eccentric implementation of a standard statistical technique called principal components analysis. Mann's version of this (which appears to be his own creation) effectively mined his hundred plus proxies for any which had hockeystick shapes and then gave them huge weight in the analysis. What is worrying about all this is not so much the fact that a paper is wrong. It is the failure to admit this when it is perfectly clear that it is wrong. Montford documents the evasions of debate and the consistent misrepresentation of what McIntyre and McKitrick actually said, as well as multiple refusals of access to data and clear descriptions of what had actually been done. By the time of the 2006 Wegman report it was clear that the hockeystick was broken, but it seems too much had been invested in it for people in paleoclimate to admit outright that it was just wrong. Montford tells this story too and documents the shenanigans surrounding the fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. But rather than me attempting to condense the book into a paragraph I urge people to buy and read this excellent account. Note that it was largely written before the emails from CRU became public, though there is a final chapter dealing quickly with them. What is remarkable is how much of the story was already known to people who had been following the debate, but also the lengths people were prepared to go to try and stifle proper debate. For me the cover-up of the story has been a bigger influence in turning me sceptical than the mere fact of the hockey stick being wrong.
111 von 157 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
5.0 von 5 Sternen
500 Wonderful Pages of "Caspar" from the Bishop!
7. Februar 2010
Von B. Hutchins
- Veröffentlicht auf Amazon.com
Format:Taschenbuch
The "Bishop Hill" blog was well-respected, but not particularly remarkable until the posting of "Caspar and the Jesus paper" in August 2008. With this posting, we learned that the esteemed Bishop (now also revealed as Andrew Montford), the author of this new book, had a talent for putting scattered bits and pieces of information into a highly coherent presentation. It was remarkable enough that he was able to take myriad blog postings and figure out what they all added up to, and further remarkable that he was able to map this understanding into writing. Would it be possible to achieve this Casper-style in a more encompassing work? Too much to ask for? Well, HERE it is!
The narrative is highly readable, not mathematical, except that Montford does specifically give the official names of things. Instead of saying something like "they blew the math" he tells you how data were improperly normalized, or the use of SVD, and the consequences. In addition to describing the ill-advised technical issues, he describes appearance of the poor science (seeing what you want to see), other more common human foibles such as possible (or likely) "cherry-picking", and the suppression of contradicting evidence, all of which are not supposed to be in science.
While it would not be difficult, based on his blog perhaps, to discern the Bishop's views on AGW and its politics, the current book is basically impartial, except as it relates to the poor science and the overriding political motives of the AGW advocates. It deals rationally and fair-mindedly with the (illusion of the) Hockey stick graph. People commenting on the book are advised to direct criticisms, if any, on the basis of what he writes rather than what "camp" they perceive the author to belong to. This does involve actually reading the book however. Expect the usual reflex one star submissions from those who review just the title - and then go on to a few stock comment about the decline in the penguin population at the North Pole.
So, by the way, how DO you get to read the book. As of this writing, it does not appear to be widely available on Amazon in the US, and let's hope that will be directly available soon. I got mine from Amazon.UK, which was surprisingly easy - pretty much like this Amazon site. Shipping was about as much as the book, but I think it was only $26 with the shipping, and it arrived in 8 days by "Royal Mail". And it's a beefy book of almost 500 page-turning pages.
The narrative is highly readable, not mathematical, except that Montford does specifically give the official names of things. Instead of saying something like "they blew the math" he tells you how data were improperly normalized, or the use of SVD, and the consequences. In addition to describing the ill-advised technical issues, he describes appearance of the poor science (seeing what you want to see), other more common human foibles such as possible (or likely) "cherry-picking", and the suppression of contradicting evidence, all of which are not supposed to be in science.
While it would not be difficult, based on his blog perhaps, to discern the Bishop's views on AGW and its politics, the current book is basically impartial, except as it relates to the poor science and the overriding political motives of the AGW advocates. It deals rationally and fair-mindedly with the (illusion of the) Hockey stick graph. People commenting on the book are advised to direct criticisms, if any, on the basis of what he writes rather than what "camp" they perceive the author to belong to. This does involve actually reading the book however. Expect the usual reflex one star submissions from those who review just the title - and then go on to a few stock comment about the decline in the penguin population at the North Pole.
So, by the way, how DO you get to read the book. As of this writing, it does not appear to be widely available on Amazon in the US, and let's hope that will be directly available soon. I got mine from Amazon.UK, which was surprisingly easy - pretty much like this Amazon site. Shipping was about as much as the book, but I think it was only $26 with the shipping, and it arrived in 8 days by "Royal Mail". And it's a beefy book of almost 500 page-turning pages.
79 von 113 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
5.0 von 5 Sternen
Colombo's Verdict: GW Perpetrated by a Hockey Stick in the Library
24. Februar 2010
Von George Gilder
- Veröffentlicht auf Amazon.com
Format:Taschenbuch|Von Amazon bestätigter Kauf
The plot of the Hockey Stick Illusion will be familiar to any follower of the Colombo shows on television. In each case, we see the humble investigator initially ignored, brushed aside, stonewalled, disdained, doubletalked, waffled, red herringed, and evaded by lofty and complacent Establishment figures, citing their own authority, crowded schedules, sophisticated reasoning, advanced degrees, abstruse mathematics, and exalted ideals.
In this case, the Columbo figure is Steve McIntyre, a Canadian mining consultant. A.W. Montford's book tells the gripping and suspenseful details of McIntyre's pursuit of the self-denominated "hockey team" led by Michael Mann, who wrote the key chapters on his own work for the IPCC, and Phil Jones, who maintains the temperature record used by the IPCC to document the "Hockey Stick": showing unprecedented and anomalous anthropogenic global warming in the Twentieth Century while denying that any comparable or greater warming occurred in the Medieval period.
McIntyre relentlessly replicates and decodes the increasingly desperate devices used by the climatocrats to defend their findings. But parallel to this fascinating story is the amazing tale of the ascent of Mann. From an obscure newly minted PhD in 1998 at the U Mass department of geosciences, he became the Lead Author of the crucial Observed Climate Variability chapter in the IPCC report, contributor to several other chapters, 'Scientific Advisor' to the White House on climate change, pundit on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, BBC, NPR, PBS, and scores of Establishment newspapers and magazines. The ascent culminates in the Nobel Peace Prize for the team and a role as the very incarnation of a Consensus of science requiring the creation of a global apparatus to stigmatize as pollution, regulate and tax the very CO2 that sustains all of plant and animal life.
Explaining the science in detail, Montford's narrative climaxes with the dissolution of the hockey stick, the discomfiture of the Hockey Team, the eruption of Climategate, and the quiet and total victory of the humble mining engineer. The reader should know that the supposed email "scandal" is in fact rather trivial and defensible. Few people are at their best in emails. But the hockey stick's science is shoddy beyond easy belief. The hockey stick chart mostly reflects a defective algorithm that extends and inflates a few deceptive signals from as few as 20 cherry-picked trees in Colorado and Russia into a tendentiously rising graph that is replicated repeatedly through reshuffles of the same or similar defective and factitious data. These people apparently had no plausible case and were pressed by their political sponsors to contrive a series of Potemkin charts.
Make no mistake. This argument is conclusive: if temperatures were warmer in the pre-industrial Medieval period, the entire global warming case for CO2 suppression collapses. Don't miss this definitive book.
GG
In this case, the Columbo figure is Steve McIntyre, a Canadian mining consultant. A.W. Montford's book tells the gripping and suspenseful details of McIntyre's pursuit of the self-denominated "hockey team" led by Michael Mann, who wrote the key chapters on his own work for the IPCC, and Phil Jones, who maintains the temperature record used by the IPCC to document the "Hockey Stick": showing unprecedented and anomalous anthropogenic global warming in the Twentieth Century while denying that any comparable or greater warming occurred in the Medieval period.
McIntyre relentlessly replicates and decodes the increasingly desperate devices used by the climatocrats to defend their findings. But parallel to this fascinating story is the amazing tale of the ascent of Mann. From an obscure newly minted PhD in 1998 at the U Mass department of geosciences, he became the Lead Author of the crucial Observed Climate Variability chapter in the IPCC report, contributor to several other chapters, 'Scientific Advisor' to the White House on climate change, pundit on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, BBC, NPR, PBS, and scores of Establishment newspapers and magazines. The ascent culminates in the Nobel Peace Prize for the team and a role as the very incarnation of a Consensus of science requiring the creation of a global apparatus to stigmatize as pollution, regulate and tax the very CO2 that sustains all of plant and animal life.
Explaining the science in detail, Montford's narrative climaxes with the dissolution of the hockey stick, the discomfiture of the Hockey Team, the eruption of Climategate, and the quiet and total victory of the humble mining engineer. The reader should know that the supposed email "scandal" is in fact rather trivial and defensible. Few people are at their best in emails. But the hockey stick's science is shoddy beyond easy belief. The hockey stick chart mostly reflects a defective algorithm that extends and inflates a few deceptive signals from as few as 20 cherry-picked trees in Colorado and Russia into a tendentiously rising graph that is replicated repeatedly through reshuffles of the same or similar defective and factitious data. These people apparently had no plausible case and were pressed by their political sponsors to contrive a series of Potemkin charts.
Make no mistake. This argument is conclusive: if temperatures were warmer in the pre-industrial Medieval period, the entire global warming case for CO2 suppression collapses. Don't miss this definitive book.
GG
›
Gehen Sie zu Amazon.com, um alle 58 Rezensionen zu sehen
4.5 von 5 Sternen
Waren diese Rezensionen hilfreich?
Wir wollen von Ihnen hören.
Kunden diskutieren
|
Das Forum zu diesem Produkt
Fragen stellen, Meinungen austauschen, Einblicke gewinnen Aktive Diskussionen in ähnlichen Foren
Kundendiskussionen durchsuchen
|
Ähnliche Foren
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lieblingslisten
Ähnliche Artikel finden
Ihr Kommentar
Möchten Sie die Produktinformationen aktualisieren oder Feedback zu den Produktabbildungen geben?
|
