Bishop Hill Met Office withdraws article about Marcott's hockey stick
Jun 14, 2013 Climate: MWP
The Met Office's My Climate and Me website has removed a blog post about the Marcott Hockey Stick:
We previously posted an article entitled “New analysis suggests the Earth is warming at a rate unprecedented for 11,300 years” covering the paper by Marcott et al in Nature. The title of our article drew on the original press release for the paper. However, we note that authors of the paper have since issued an extensive response to media coverage [http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/03/response-by-marcott-et-al/] which includes the following statement:
Q: Is the rate of global temperature rise over the last 100 years faster than at any time during the past 11,300 years?
A: Our study did not directly address this question because the paleotemperature records used in our study have a temporal resolution of ~120 years on average, which precludes us from examining variations in rates of change occurring within a century. Other factors also contribute to smoothing the proxy temperature signals contained in many of the records we used, such as organisms burrowing through deep-sea mud, and chronological uncertainties in the proxy records that tend to smooth the signals when compositing them into a globally averaged reconstruction. We showed that no temperature variability is preserved in our reconstruction at cycles shorter than 300 years, 50% is preserved at 1000-year time scales, and nearly all is preserved at 2000-year periods and longer. Our Monte-Carlo analysis accounts for these sources of uncertainty to yield a robust (albeit smoothed) global record. Any small “upticks” or “downticks” in temperature that last less than several hundred years in our compilation of paleoclimate data are probably not robust, as stated in the paper.
In the light of this statement from the authors, we no longer consider our headline to be appropriate.
Reader Comments (114)
I think the Metoffice is going through a crisis of confidence. (...)
Jun 16, 2013 at 10:01 PM Pharos
Pharos, I think you are right. Special meetings called by management are usually a sign of panic and a tacit admission that the normal business processes of the organisation are not coping with things.
Not long ago, I posted what I imagined might have some of the Met Office's behind the scenes discussions:
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2013/4/24/another-mp-develops-an-interest-in-statistics.html#comment19967732
I imagine that, post Climategate, there would have been discussions including something like:
-"should we engage with de----- er, sceptics? Or continue to dismiss them as flat-earth cranks?"
I imagine that the upshot of such a discussion, which undoubtedly took place, was that the Met Office management decided to find someone within the Met Office for the "outreach to sceptics" role, having had the following properties:
- Good communicator, capable of interacting positively with people of differing views.
- Strong tact and diplomacy skills.
- Committed to CO2 = greenhouse but without excessively rigid/extreme views.
- Good knowledge of Met Office research and operations.
- Familiar with internet social media.
Perhaps (I am just guessing) that the management recognised it would be a bit of a shitty job and whoever was identified for the role would need to be convinced to take it on by being offered odious alternatives such as a spell as "Head of Integration and Growth" (or something equivalent).
I've got respect for Betts, because I think his respect for us is genuine. I've also noticed him calling out peers on several occasions for inaccurate or offensive anti-sceptic stuff. Tamsin also. But for the corporate entity as a whole and their public messaging - the opposite: contempt mostly. Betts is probably embarassed by much of it himself, and must bite his lip.
Signs of desperation-
Cold NH winters - might be because of melting Arctic ice in summer, but no viable model explaining how.
Warming stasis - missing heat could be in deep ocean (but no proof).
I've got respect for Betts, because I think his respect for us is genuine. (...) Betts is probably embarassed by much of it himself, and must bite his lip.
(...)
Jun 17, 2013 at 12:29 AM Pharos
Yes, Pharos, well put.
I think also he sticks to telling the truth.
He has a very difficult job in his "outreach" role.
It's a fundamental corporate rule that you do not criticise the organisation you work for and that includes not criticising your superiors in the organisation (nor your other colleagues).
My problem with Richard Betts is that he says different things to different audiences.
Like this at the "& beyond 4 degrees" conference at Oxford.
"If greenhouse gas emissions continue at current rates for much of the coming century, we can expect a very wide variation in regional climate responses across the globe. This presentation examines a large number of climate simulations to assess such potential changes and the ranges of
uncertainty in these... the Arctic ocean surface is projected to warm faster than the global mean
due to positive feedbacks from melting sea ice (Figure 1). At 4°C global warming, regional
warming of 10°C or more is plausible in the Arctic. High levels of warming such as 7°C are
also projected for many land regions."
Just which Richard Betts do you think speaks to policy makers?
Don - still not following you. At a 4C-and-beyond conference Betts speaks of possible scenarios at 4C-and-beyond. And the issue is...?
@omnologos 4 degrees and above is at the top end of (discredited) model predictions.
These are the drivers of current Government insanity with regards "decarbonisation" and "green" energy subsidies which are driving more and more people into fuel poverty and early graves.
That is my issue.
Agree with Don. That entire extract shown from the conference in Oxford is pure scaremongering BS with no scientific validation or justification in any remote sense. If this is the sort of advice given to policymakers from MO scientists, it's a shame.
We'll have to disagree on this detail. If I am asked to describe the situation at my workplace if London and New York disappear from Earth, I can do it in a knowledgeable way however unlikely it is for London and New York to disappear from Earth at the same time.
Likewise a climate impacts scientist invited to a 4C+ conference can talk about 4C+ impacts independently from the likelihood of 4C being attained.
@ omnologos
"Likewise a climate impacts scientist invited to a 4C+ conference can talk about 4C+ impacts independently from the likelihood of 4C being attained."
Quite true, but what do you think the message the numbskull "policy makers" go away with?
omnologos, the met office press release says 4 degrees is likely though
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2009/four-degrees
" If greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise unchecked, it is
likely that global warming will exceed four degrees by the end of
the century, research by Met Office scientists has revealed."
Dr Betts clearly wants CO2 emissions reduced from his very clear statements in the met office press release.
‘Dr Betts said: "Four degrees of warming, averaged over the globe,
translates into even greater warming in many regions, along with
major changes in rainfall. If greenhouse gas emissions are not cut
soon, we could see major climate changes within our own
lifetimes."‘
‘ er rainfall increases the risk of river flooding.
Dr Betts added: "Together these impacts will have very large
consequences for food security, water availability and health.
However, it is possible to avoid these dangerous levels of
temperature rise by cutting greenhouse gas emissions. If global
emissions peak within the next decade and then decrease rapidly
it may be possible to avoid at least half of the four degrees of
warming."'
Rob - Betts has changed his mind since and said so repeatedly here too. He's probably discovered also that his new message has zero listeners among policymakers.
Remember, in climate like in any other public health issue, it's seldom possible to say "nothing to worry" and keep a scientific job at the same time.
No signs of a crisis of confidence here:
*****
3 June 2013 - Climate Service UK, a new initiative led by the Met Office will provide users with vital information to help them manage exposure to climate variability and change.
Building on the Met Office's expanding knowledge of climate science, ever-improving climate forecasts, and growing understanding of how climate impacts society and the environment, Climate Service UK marks a step-change in the provision of services to assess how a changing climate might affect business and society.
*****
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/news/releases/archive/2013/climate-service-uk
And that's despite Brian Hoskins' witterings on R4 today as I type.
"...ever-improving climate forecasts"
haha