The Climate Hockey Stick is Wrong!

Spread the love

This is a hockey stick:

hockeystick

This is the Grim Reaper’s Scythe:

sythe

This is global temperature over the last 10,000 years projected into the immediate future using good scientific estimates:

Carbon-Final

You decide. Should the Hockey Stick be replaced with the Grim Reaper’s Scythe?

More information on the climate change graphic HERE.

See more climate change graphics HERE.

If you are not sure what any of this is about, you can read about the Hockey Stick thing here.

Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:

In Search of Sungudogo by Greg Laden, now in Kindle or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.

Spread the love

13 thoughts on “The Climate Hockey Stick is Wrong!

  1. Only thing is the curve at the top of the scythe. Really important to avoid giving the impression that things can go backwards in time. 🙂

  2. Nice job. Do you think it will really curve backward in time, like the scythe? That could give us a few more years …

  3. Ah, according to the graph, the Earth’s average temperature will be 180F by 2300…sounds legit. (The underlying data used in the graph was found to be flawed, there isn’t a blue uptick like that)

  4. If the graph is flawed there will be peer-reviewed publications showing exactly is wrong with it. At the moment it is confirmed by some other overlaps for part of it. Till something shows up that withstands peer review in journals calling it so flawed as to be completely wrong I wishful thinking.

  5. Another interesting (and grim) fact about the abundant anthropogenic input of CO2 into our atmosphere is that even if we reduced our CO2 output to 0 today, there will still be a large global increase in temperature. Because the half-life of CO2 follows a negatively exponential scale, there is no possibility of a significant reduction of the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 within the next thousand years. A must-read for those who are interested:
    http://forecast.uchicago.edu/Projects/archer.2009.ann_rev_tail.pdf

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *