Customer Reviews: Hiding the Decline
Your Garage Best Books of the Month Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it Eli Paperboy Explore Premium Audio Fire TV Stick Sun Care Patriotic Picks Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer AnnedroidsS3 AnnedroidsS3 AnnedroidsS3  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Best Camping & Hiking Gear in Outdoors

Customer Reviews

3.6 out of 5 stars19
Format: Paperback|Change
Price:$17.99+ Free shipping with Amazon Prime
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on January 15, 2013
The author A.W. Montford wrote a thrilling scientific detective story regarding the famous Hockey Stick graph, which at one stroke got rid of the Medieval Warming Period (when the Vikings settled Greenland (Vinland then because it was warm enough to grow grapes)) and the Little Ice Age when the Thames froze over. Instead temperatures were nice and flat until the 20th century when they swooped upward like the curve of a hockey stick. The graphbecame the central icon of those who believed the world was headed for catastrphic global warming. Montford's book, the Hockey Stick Illustion: Climategate and the Corruption of Science, followed the patient unraveling of this flawed idea by a retired mining engineer named Steve McIntyre, who overcame years of stonewalling and was eventually able to reverse engineer the reasoning that led to the famous graph and show that the statistics were faulty.

Now Montford is back looking into the equally infamous episode known as hiding the decline. Tree ring growth had been used to estimate temperatures in the past millenium, but beginning about 1960 they were not behaving--they showed temperatures were cooling whereas thermometers showed they were rising. So the scientists cut off their badly behaving tree ring curve and overlaid it after about 1960 with the measured temperatures. Never mind that if they were misbehaving now what might they have been doing back in the time when there were no thermometers. This would have destroyed decades of work so couldn't be allowed to stand. Montford delves deeply into the story and once again shows the ability to make a fascinating detective story out of this shocking example of scientific fraud.
11 comment|31 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 22, 2012
In 2010, Montford wrote one of the best books on Global Warming and the corrupted climatology community "The Hockey Stick Illusion." The Climategate incident occurred in late 2009, when he had nearly completed that book. He will delay the completion of his book to cover Climategate in one 50 page long last chapter. Within it, he discloses tens of the most outrageous emails that reflect on the most corrupted scientific community. But, Climategate will go on for another two years beyond the release of his first book. And, this sequel is essentially following up on Climategate to cover the subsequent official investigations that will whitewash and exonerate the climatology community while entirely ignoring the incriminating works of Steve McIntyre. Given the nature of those investigations we don't learn much we did not know after reading The Hockey Stick Illusion: Climategate and the Corruption of Science (Independent Minds).

This is not to say that this book does not have merit. It is an important public document capturing well Climategate in its entirety. It also informs about a few other shenanigans that climatologists did to manufacture temperature replications. Focusing on related technical data issues, this book reinforces some insights and offers a few new ones.

The first confirmed insight is that tree ring temperature proxies are unreliable. Tree rings widths differ for numerous reasons besides temperature. Invariably, many tree ring temperature proxies will completely diverge from actual temperature records. This is the main subject of the book: Keith Briffa's tree ring generated temperature proxies that show a declining temperature trend post 1960. This is just the opposite vs the two famous hockey stick patterns generated by Michael Mann and Phil Jones respectively. The related graph is on the cover of the book and Figure 4.2 on page 87. Jones did the "Hiding the Decline" bit by either truncating Riffa's series to 1960, or fusing it post 1960 with actual temperature records. Those various subterfuges are graphed on pg 88, 89, 173, 174. This allowed Mann, Jones, and Riffa to present to subsequent IPCC assessments that the Hockey Stick temperature record pattern had been independently reconstructed by all three of them. What kind of independence is that?

Another insight is that actual temperature records are not as accurate as "actual" entails. Records from China are of terrible quality. Doug Keenan uncovered that out of 84 Chinese meteorological stations series 49 have no history and another 35 had been relocated or were deemed inconsistent. Only 7 or less than 10% of them have adequate consistent temperature history data. Yet, Phil Jones will use the entire Chinese data when building his worldwide temperature records (pg 49, 50). A junior researcher, Ian Harris, in charge of compiling data confirms unreliable time series is a common problem for other regions. He mentions that data from Australia is nearly as bad as China's (pg. 165). He then states "shouldn't usually plot past 1960 because these will be artificially adjusted to look closer to the real temperatures." That statement is an email from Climategate disclosed on pg. 166.

There is another reason why temperature records are inaccurate: the well known urban island effect whereby temperature rises as urban density increases. Phil Jones is the climatologist that first uncovered this effect in the 90s. But, ultimately he will disregard it to preserve the upward trend of the hockey stick.

Climatologists data fabrications have a predictable pattern. Old temperature proxies are manipulated so that temperatures in the past centuries are deemed low and newer ones are deemed high. This is to flatten the Warm Medieval Period and create the hockey stick pattern. Montford extensively covered that in "The Hockey Stick Illusion" by showing that Michael Mann's short-centring Principal Component Analysis method was flawed and created hockey stick patterns out of random data (Steve McIntyre's work). Other fabrications related to the mentioned "actual" temperature records over the past 150 years that are tweaked to confirm the abrupt rise in temperature in recent times.
0Comment|22 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on November 22, 2012
A lot of us enjoy reading a good book a second, or even a third time. I have read Montford's Hockey Stick Illusion three times - most recently about a month before learning of this upcoming new book. We read books multiple times when they continue to reward our efforts. In a new reading, we find something we missed the first time. Or we did not appreciate the importance of something the first time. But we do in some sense "remember" much of it deep down - the framework is still there, the decorations are put back in place, and often we re-anticipate the impending content.

So here is a new book. In reading it, I was often of the impression as though I had read it before. Now right away, let me dispense with any notion that you don't need to read this because it is history. You DO need to read this - desperately. As you would expect, in the account there are likely things you "remember" but also items you may have forgotten, or perhaps never happened to run into. Also, many things, for all I remember, are very likely pointed out here for the first time.

For those events we remember well, or are reminded of, where did you see them the first time? On the blogs - in real time. So, the good Bishop has done it again - somehow organized all this for us in a convenient, and in fact an exciting and even entertaining package. Well not quite. Much is too serious to be truly entertaining. A lot of it will make you angry (again?). That this was done (and still is being done) to us all so blatantly, and that we are all held in total disdain by these self-serving alarmist pretenders; remains hard to take.

The science of climate is extremely complex, and to this we did not really need politics and dogma added. Fortunately, a lot of very good people have been fighting this very well. If we had to single out just one on the hero side, it would obviously have to be Steve McIntyre as champion supreme. For years I have read the Climate Audit blog in awe - he did it yet again! He takes on an issue in a highly focused manner, scientifically, honestly, as a gentleman, and with an astounding ability to get his mind around all the facts. We could wish the "world's leading climate scientist" could do what he himself seems to do every day just for one day a year. He puts it all together, in neat packages, and here it all is on the CA blog. We owe him big. He posts these neat packages and then moves forward, seeming tirelessly, and seems never to be defeated by mere disappointments. Reading his posting, we feel enlightened, but it is hard to stay with him. The rest of us are in general just not that good.

But we do remember the framework. And this is where Andrew Montford on the Bishop Hill blog comes in with his sometimes extended postings and certainly with his (now) two books. Andrew, to me, seems to be the macro to Steve's micro. He puts together the sections and chapters and forms a book (literally), with the same sort of astounding organizational and explanatory skills that Steve does - getting the bigger pieces all in order. I don't know how he gets his mind around all this either.

Andrew's book is not just about "Climategate". Indeed, looking at the sources only 1/4 of them are from CG1 and CG2 emails. The rest are diverse: from blogs, articles, and public reports, particularly of boards of inquiries. The inquiries (four or more of them) were in response to possible misconduct on the alarmists' part, principally as exposed by climategate emails. Such matters as the eponymous "hide the decline", perversion of peer review, manipulations to evade FOI, agenda-driven "science", etc. Here we find another "mirror" of McIntyre/Montford. Much as McIntyre generally outclasses the official "world leading climate scientists" on the technical stage, Montford, by this very book, has vastly outclassed the review panels in the fields of investigation and reporting. It is perhaps a bit painful to read how one panel after another "failed" their responsibility in most important senses, becoming (or is it revealing themselves as) just another part of the problem.

So - the book - it's about Climategate of course. It's a page-turner. We have the expected players: McIntyre, McKitrick, Mann, Jones, Briffa, not to mention the still unknown leaker. And many more very FAMILIAR names; we could easily list at least a hundred others - literally too numerous to list.

Here is why you need this book even if you were following the issues all along. Do you remember (to list a few): Charles the Moderator, Keenan, Holland, Boulton, Russell, Oxburgh, Saiers, Yamal, Wang, Lucia (Of course you know her - but how was she involved in the first notice of Climategate). And that's much the point: Climategate (I) was three years ago. Yes, your mind likely needs a refresh, and gaps need to be patched. Thanks again Andrew.
0Comment|32 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 25, 2013
Not an easy book to read, as it is more forensic than entertaining. It goes into a level of detail that is essential for the subject, but almost numbing in its complexity. Even so I found it enthralling and horrifying by turns. Montfort has not attempted a novel like presentation, although the story of hiding the decline will undoubtedly be presented as such some time in the near future. Rather this is a text book. It will be the source material from which others will mine the nuggets. And this book is full of them. Personally I see the whole episode as a morality play examining the nature of hubris. I do not think that these were bad men, but they became so convinced of the righteousness of their cause that they lost all sense of balance and proportion. History will judge them harshly. They are not the first good and clever men to have been seduced by an ideology, and they will not be the last. A story that is sadly shocking, but not a surprise.
0Comment|20 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on November 19, 2012
While this is 300 pages of (climate science) inside baseball, it is a home run.

In the final section Montford writes "The tale of Climategate and its aftermath is not an edifying one.
As we look back over the ten years of this story, the impression we get is of a wave of dishonesty, a public sector that will spin and lie, and mislead and lie, and distort and lie, and lie again."

Montford pulls no punches in his finale, but in the body of the book dispassionately tells the story with much detail, supporting his conclusion.

This book is important.
0Comment|25 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on September 16, 2013
Montford writes clearly based on a careful analysis of the events leading to the leak of Cllimategate emails, and clearly analyzes the evidence brought at the (ineffectual) hearings. I gathered from reviews I read before purchase that readers' impressions depended overwhelmingly on their predisposition toward the subject matter. I found it fascinating, a courtroom drama without a good cross-examining trial attorney on the job.
0Comment|14 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on January 3, 2013
This book provides a measured, well-researched review of the aftermath of Climegate, namely the various ineffective inquiries in the UK and Penn State University investigating alleged malfeasance in the field of climate research. The author comes to the justified conclusion that whitewashes were the predetermined outcomes.
0Comment|13 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on July 27, 2013
Montford previously nicely discussed the Hockey-Stick fiasco. Here he undertakes an update focusing on the Climategate fiasco–the posting of hacked e-mails from the University of East Anglia that among other things indicated a desire to intimidate those skeptical of the need for an immediate and extensive effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The nature of this effort and the failures at several levels appropriately to evaluate the propriety of that pressure campaign are the focus of the book. By and large, he does an admirable job of exposing the whole sorry episode. One problem is leaving some key things undocumented. To me, the most important was incompleteness of his treatment of his earlier, shorter review of Climategate. He talks only of a GWPF report. Digging disclosed that GWPF is short for Global Warming Policy Foundation, which published Montford's effort and other interesting material on global warming.
0Comment|10 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
Well written. Chapter 1 was great review of earlier book on "The Hockey Stick Illusion.".

What was role of Freedom of Information requests in accelerating cover-ups?

"Collegiality" is misused or abused to shy away from the real issues, cover up facts and try to keep all on a friendly basis. It's a common problem in academe in the US and UK.

Accountability standards appear non-existent. In UK. IN US, after the increased accountability requirements, it's a big surprise to see such a lack of accountability on the part of certain individuals..

"Siege mentality." Problem here everything was taken too personally - a personal attack. Again, common problem in academe.

The use of blogs, web sites, etc to argue science is a new twist and its reliability is questionable. Some of it is extremely useful. ftp protocols an issue too. Archiving on memory stick is acceptable ONLY as back-up.

Media role unusual -only because of implications of climate change in social context. Moreover, most of the key scientists clearly did not have experience handling media inquiries, questions, or requests, and some let it go to their heads.

Crosscultural aspects - Different cultures seem to manage science differently or conduct its protocols differently?
Problem of oversight by those lacking expertise or knowledge emerges a major contributor to the cover-ups and disclosurs..
0Comment|5 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on May 7, 2015
Don't be fooled by claims that official investigations exonerated the culprits in the Climategate scandal. Nothing could be farther from the truth. This book goes into the details of why--and why claims of historically unprecedented, dangerous, manmade global warming lack credibility.
0Comment|2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse