Skip to content

The Return Of The Hockey Stick

September 5, 2021

By Paul Homewood


h/t Ian Magness


A good, easily digestible summary of the IPCC’s latest fraudulent Hockey Stick:




  1. T Walker permalink
    September 5, 2021 10:53 am

    Yet more evidence that the summary doesn’t reflect the content of the report which will only get fully released after COP26.

    Thanks for the video MIchelle

  2. September 5, 2021 11:51 am
    Put in search box “Ball defeats Mann” for an account of how climatologist Dr Tim Ball won his court case vs Mikey Mann, the original fat fraud who pulled the original hockey stick out of a lone pine tree.
    John Doran.

  3. Graeme No.3 permalink
    September 5, 2021 12:01 pm

    Every second or third IPCC Report brings a new Hockey Stick, even less believable than the last.
    I read the Scientific report on Global Warming (as it was called then) in the third and fourth Reports while trying to make up my mind. There was a book published about then called “Weasel Words” and I knew just what they meant. “would, could, might, may, possibly” etc. I knew what the book meant.
    After the almost certain failure of the Glasgow conference I wonder if they will pother writing anymore, even the most gullible aren’t going to be fooled. Simpler to just repeat previous (deleted).

    • Up2snuff permalink
      September 5, 2021 6:34 pm

      Graeme, before the ‘Weasel Words’ came ‘Definite Claims’. It was then I knew that it was all bunkum, or worse – a deception – because I had been warned off scientists who made wild ‘Definite Claims’ some years before. The ‘Weasel Words’ stems from the ‘Climate Change’ adjustment to ‘Global Warming’ made by Tony Blair and others in the late 1990s, just in case the deceivers get caught out by real world realities and it all never happens.

  4. September 5, 2021 12:15 pm

    We have reached the point I warned a woman at the Smithsonian Institution’s Environmental Dept. in the 1970’s. She and another had a project where they were always plumbing me for data from mine. I saw them playing a bit fast-and-loose with what they were doing.

    One day I told her: “If scientists fib or fudge their data, when the general public catches on….and they will,,,,academia will be forever trying to get their reputation back.” That has certainly come true.

    A society which accepts lies as truth without question will not survive.

  5. Broadlands permalink
    September 5, 2021 1:17 pm

    A simple mathematical “trick” applied to the global temperature anomaly values will remove the upward trend. Start at the beginning of the record (NASA GISTemp 1970-onward). Subtract the second value from the first (e.g. 1970) and continue to the last…the year-over-year change. Plot the graph. Voila..upward trend is gone…almost imperceptible? Try the same thing with Mauna Loa CO2…the upward trend remains. Correlation is gone?

    Hide the decline or hide the hockey stick. Take your pick.

    • September 5, 2021 3:29 pm

      The amusing thing about Mauna Loa is that it lies directly downwind of the two major CO2 emitters – China and India. But of course you wouldn’t notice that on a standard Mercator projection because the only thing west of Mauna Loa is the International Date Line. So don’t tell the IPCC.

      • John Hultquist permalink
        September 5, 2021 5:04 pm

        You seem to be suggesting that the CO2 monitoring of the general troposphere at Mauna Loa and elsewhere is faulty. You can visit the web pages and read what is done and how it is done, and how the results are checked against other sites around the world.
        Also, winds only occasionally reach Mauna Loa from China and India. At this time (about 16 UTC Sept 5) the wind is blowing from Hawaii toward China, and around India the air is doing its own thing – a big loop going north.

  6. Cheshire Red permalink
    September 5, 2021 1:54 pm

    At some point these people and organisations MUST be held accountable for what is obvious data fraud.

    They’re advancing their ideological positions and careers while enriching themselves, on the back of made-up (ie FAKE) data. If financial advisors pulled this blag they’d be in jail.

    How is this not criminal behaviour?
    How is this not political extortion?
    How is this not highest-level corruption?
    Where are the investigations?
    Where are the police?

    Never mind COP26, these people should be hauled in by the cops and thrown in front of a Crown court jury to answer for their crimes.

    • Jordan permalink
      September 5, 2021 7:57 pm

      Cheshire – there is no enforcement of standards to determine who qualifies to call themselves a “scientist”. Career academics frequently call themselves “scientists”, but will strongly resist regulation and enforcement of standards on arguments of intellectual freedom.
      Consider that a humble landlord, taxi driver, HGV driver, or waste collector is required by law to operate under a permit or license. They may be subject to prosecution if they don’t.
      Licensing and permitting is held to be in the public interest, for example to ensure waste is recycled/disposed appropriately as there is an ongoing problem of illegal fly tipping which only increases as the Landfill Tax is driven up to incentivise better waste treatment alternatives.
      Which leads to an irony: as Legal incentives for good behaviour are strengthened, the reward for cheating also increases.
      It’s an uneasy balance to strike. It is unattractive to introduce regulations to determine what is and isn’t good scientific practice. There would be unintended consequences if we tried. But this leaves “scientist” at the bottom end of a pecking order as “scientist” sits below “skivvy” in terms of accountability.
      Which is also ironic, because people usually refer to themselves as a “scientist” as an appeal to gain your admiration. They don’t like it when you point out that anybody can call themselves a scientist.

  7. Cheshire Red permalink
    September 5, 2021 1:56 pm

    PS The lady has her hockey stick the wrong way around (for viewers) and many uninformed people won’t know what the heck she’s talking about.

    • dennisambler permalink
      September 5, 2021 3:25 pm

      I thought the same.

  8. Richard Greene permalink
    September 5, 2021 2:53 pm

    I’ve summarized the IPCC report
    (every one, not just the latest one)

    Assuming all climate change is caused by humans, and is dangerous,
    we have determined that climate change is caused by humans,
    and is dangerous.

  9. Harry Passfield permalink
    September 5, 2021 4:21 pm

    Now here’s a thing. I’ve noticed just lately that there is an awful lot of focus on anti-vaxxers and the great claim that they are evil ‘deniers’ – which they may well be. But, I think the PTB are preparing to associate them to CC realists. That way we will all be tarred with the same brush and make us so much easier to dismiss. Just a thought.

    • cookers52 permalink
      September 6, 2021 5:29 am

      The JCVI will not sanction the general use of any of the currently available Covid vaccines for children. The benefits do not outweigh risks. The risks and safety concerns are well documented and known, unfortunately the history of respiratory disease vaccine development is littered with the bodies of dead children.

      The government aren’t happy that the JCVI, and are pressuring the chief medical officer to reach a different conclusion.

      All this is happening without scrutiny.

  10. Cheshire Red permalink
    September 5, 2021 4:36 pm

    If you can bear it here’s Nick Cohen’s latest vitriolic attack on those who don’t share his hysterical terror of plant food.

    It should come with a health warning, and make sure any family pets are safely outside of kicking range.

    • Julian Flood permalink
      September 5, 2021 8:12 pm

      Oxford PPE. Nuff said.


  11. September 5, 2021 6:22 pm

    Groundhog Day again for Steve McIntyre. The alarmist hockey shtick is only good for own goals.

  12. Crowcatcher permalink
    September 5, 2021 6:29 pm

    Here is Private Eye’s take on COP 26 (With apologies for copywrite) , I found it fairly amusing but the Eye is (obviously) on the protagonist side :-

    Climate Summit Raises Hopes For Future Of Planet
    By Our Environment Correspondent Gus Boiler

    GOVERNMENT minister for the environment, Alok Sharma, hailed the Glasgow eco-convention as the last chance not to sort out the global problem of catastrophic climate change.

    He said that the much heralded “NotMuchCop 26” would see a gathering of theWorld’s top politicians, flying into discuss pressing green issues and the urgent necessity for action before doing nothing.

    He said, “We expect NotMuchCop 26 to deliver nearly as little as the Paris Agreement, CopOut 25, Where the major world powers agreed to do net zero by the time of NotMuchCop26. Which we have done. Meeting the zero target easily.”

    Mr Sharma immediately published his plan for action, called: “Deeds not Words” —a thousand page document,outlining all the speeches yet to be made — concluding that there would be more hot air emitted into the atmosphere in Glasgow than even China can manage.”

    “It’s great , to haveBritain in the driving seat of the diesel car that is NotMuchCop 26.”

    One can but hope!!

  13. cookers52 permalink
    September 6, 2021 4:31 am

    This video does not explain what Steve McIntyre actually said about the IPCC hockey stick 2021 version.
    The video and explanation is worse than some articles by Matt McGrath .

  14. Stonyground permalink
    September 6, 2021 12:44 pm

    If the new hockey stick graph isn’t even in the scientific report but only in the summary for policymakers, to me that crosses a line. It is one thing them passing their shonky and biased pseudoscience onto the politicians. It is quite another matter if they are including stuff that isn’t even pretended to have any scientific backing, stuff that they have just made up.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: