Where is Michael Mann’s AMO data from?

Well known hockeyjockey Michael Mann has a post up on Huffpo, claiming the ‘hiatus’ or ‘plateau’ in global warming which he says doesn’t exist, only happened because oscillations. To prove this he introduces a new one, which he calls the NMO. I think it stands for Numerically Magical Obfuscation.

NMO is derived from some twisty manipulation of the AMO (in blue) and the PMO (in green).

Just because Mann ‘invented’ the AMO doesn’t mean he gets to fiddle with the underlying data does it?

Josh: 2015 Calendar of Climate Capers now available in time for Christmas

Get your orders in quickly, Josh’s 2015 calendar is going to run out faster than Mickey Mann’s box of ‘pause excuse chocs’! The indispensable companion to your climate year, every year. Josh’s wry look at the science, culture, media, and politics of Global Warming is out now. Click the image to be whisked away to the order page or use this link.

Professor Roger Pielke Jr Snaps Marcott et al Hockeystick

Hats off to Prof. Roger Pileke Jr, who has followed Steve McIntyre’s lead in standing up for science in the face of continued lies and scientific fraud. Here are some highlights from the post linked above:

In 1991 the National Research Council proposed what has come to be a widely accepted definition of misconduct in science:
Misconduct in science is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism, in proposing, performing, or reporting research. Misconduct in science does not include errors of judgment; errors in the recording, selection, or analysis of data; differences in opinions involving the interpretation of data; or misconduct unrelated to the research process.
Arguments over data and methods are the lifeblood of science, and are not instances of misconduct.

However, here I document the gross misrepresentation of the findings of a recent scientific paper via press release which appears to skirt awfully close to crossing the line into research misconduct, as defined by the NRC. I recommend steps to fix this mess, saving face for all involved, and a chance for this small part of the climate community to take a step back toward unambiguous scientific integrity.