The Hockey Stick Illusion and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
Trade in your item
Get a $3.48
Gift Card.
Have one to sell?
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more

The Hockey Stick Illusion: Climategate and the Corruption of Science (Independent Minds) Paperback


See all 3 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from Collectible from
Kindle
"Please retry"
Paperback
"Please retry"
$12.96 $13.19

NO_CONTENT_IN_FEATURE

Image
Looking for the Audiobook Edition?
Tell us that you'd like this title to be produced as an audiobook, and we'll alert our colleagues at Audible.com. If you are the author or rights holder, let Audible help you produce the audiobook: Learn more at ACX.com.

Product Details

  • Series: Independent Minds
  • Paperback: 482 pages
  • Publisher: Stacey International; 1 edition (March 2010)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 1906768358
  • ISBN-13: 978-1906768355
  • Product Dimensions: 7.7 x 5.1 x 1.3 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 1.3 pounds
  • Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (73 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #350,512 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Editorial Reviews

Review

Andrew Montford's The Hockey Stick Illusion is one of the best science books in years...This book deserves to win prizes.
Matt Ridley, Prospect


Andrew Montford tells this detective story in exhilarating style.
Joe Brannan, Geoscientist


Montford, who conducts a blog mostly about climate, called Bishop Hill and used his accounting skills of patience and precision in dealing with heaps of data to tell a connected and, often, thrilling story. --HARRY EAGAR, Staff Writer The Maui News July 11 2010

You may have heard that the 20th century was the warmest in 1,000 years, or that the 1990s were the warmest decade in at least 600 years. Perhaps you also know that these claims originated in peer-reviewed science, which produced a temperature graph showing a hockey stick shape.
These claims are, in fact, bogus. It was obvious from the start that they were at least dubious, because when professor Michael Mann stated that his studies showed that "there was no Medieval Warm Period," the fact of a MWP had already been established, beyond dispute, by direct observations made by the French social historian Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie.
Why, then, did Mann's hockey stick persuade so many people? A.W. Montford, an English accountant, does not answer that question - except indirectly, by showing that the people persuaded did not look at it carefully - but he does explain, in detail, why the hockey stick was junk science.

Improbably, the story reads like a murder mystery, a combination of locked room puzzler (how did Mann and his associates get a hockey stick where it could not have existed?) and courtroom drama (as Sherlock Montford presents the forensic deconstruction of the trick).
Montford, who conducts a blog mostly about climate, called Bishop Hill and used his accounting skills of patience and precision in dealing with heaps of data to tell a connected and, often, thrilling story.
Although the Hockey Team did, and is still doing, its best to keep its data secret, the persuasive advantage that Montford has is that all his claims are based on documents, many of which are reproduced in his book.
"The Hockey Stick Illusion" deserves space on the shelf of classic books about science fraud like Peter Medawar's "The Strange Case of the Spotted Mice." Montford, though not a scientist, is a good choice to tell this story, for, as Medawar said, "There is poetry in science but also a lot of bookkeeping." --HARRY EAGAR, Staff Writer The Maui News July 11 2010

About the Author

Andrew Montford - The author studied chemistry at St Andrews University. He is a respected blogger at Bishop Hill where his layperson's explanations of the Hockey Stick debate have won wide acclaim. He lives in rural Scotland with his wife and three children.

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Yet the book is very well written and understandable.
Crosslands
In it, he recommends this book, saying that the hockey stick has been "utterly debunked by the work of Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick".
Canman
I knew a lot about Steve McIntyre's investigative work by reading the excellent Shattered Consensus: The True State of Global Warming.
Gaetan Lion

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

248 of 318 people found the following review helpful By M. PHELPS on January 25, 2010
Format: Paperback
This is a superb review of the story of the hockeystick, the temperature reconstruction which was supposed to show that late 20th century temperatures were unprecedented for at least 1,000 years and which was highlighted in the third IPCC report in 2001. What Montford does in this book is take us through Steven McIntyre's attempt to reproduce the original result of Michael Mann and the controversy that followed. His account is very well written and it reads like a detective story. The technical details of the debate are clearly explained even though there is no heavy mathematics or statistics. He tells the story chronologically and gives a good feel of what people on both sides of the debate actually said at the time (and there are plenty of references as well as judicious quotes from all sides). I have been following this debate for the past five years or so. To my mind this gives as clear an account of the debate as we are likely to see. What is now clear is that the Mann conclusions, far from being based on coherent evidence across a geographical widespread range of proxies all showing similar patterns across the Northern hemisphere, were based on a tiny subset of proxies, bristlecone and foxtail pines, from California whose anomalous 20th century growth was almost certainly not caused by high temperature. The apparently broad evidence was an illusion created by an eccentric implementation of a standard statistical technique called principal components analysis. Mann's version of this (which appears to be his own creation) effectively mined his hundred plus proxies for any which had hockeystick shapes and then gave them huge weight in the analysis. What is worrying about all this is not so much the fact that a paper is wrong.Read more ›
52 Comments Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
119 of 172 people found the following review helpful By B. Hutchins on February 6, 2010
Format: Paperback
The "Bishop Hill" blog was well-respected, but not particularly remarkable until the posting of "Caspar and the Jesus paper" in August 2008. With this posting, we learned that the esteemed Bishop (now also revealed as Andrew Montford), the author of this new book, had a talent for putting scattered bits and pieces of information into a highly coherent presentation. It was remarkable enough that he was able to take myriad blog postings and figure out what they all added up to, and further remarkable that he was able to map this understanding into writing. Would it be possible to achieve this Casper-style in a more encompassing work? Too much to ask for? Well, HERE it is!

The narrative is highly readable, not mathematical, except that Montford does specifically give the official names of things. Instead of saying something like "they blew the math" he tells you how data were improperly normalized, or the use of SVD, and the consequences. In addition to describing the ill-advised technical issues, he describes appearance of the poor science (seeing what you want to see), other more common human foibles such as possible (or likely) "cherry-picking", and the suppression of contradicting evidence, all of which are not supposed to be in science.

While it would not be difficult, based on his blog perhaps, to discern the Bishop's views on AGW and its politics, the current book is basically impartial, except as it relates to the poor science and the overriding political motives of the AGW advocates. It deals rationally and fair-mindedly with the (illusion of the) Hockey stick graph. People commenting on the book are advised to direct criticisms, if any, on the basis of what he writes rather than what "camp" they perceive the author to belong to.
Read more ›
1 Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
69 of 100 people found the following review helpful By Crosslands on February 23, 2010
Format: Paperback
Mr. Montford has written an extremely important and interesting book. The topic is scientific fraud, one of the biggest such frauds in the history of humanity. The fraud is the hockey stick assertion that the earth in the late twentieth century experienced unprecedented global warming and higher temperatures, at least for the past two thousand years. If this fraud had remained not refuted humanity would been subject to restrictions that would greatly reduce living standards and freedom. There is a lot a stake with the hockey stick hoax.

Mr. Montford describes in great detail how two courageous, persistent, and heroic Canadian researchers managed to refute the hockey stick hoax. Mr. Montford writes about how these Canadians managed to obtain the data and publish their work. Mr. Montford also goes into great detail about the misuse of data and poor methodology that characterized the hockey stick assertion. He provides a lot of information about the statistical principle components method and how this method was misused to derive the hockey stick shape for the world temperatures over the last thousand years. He also discusses the tree ring data and how such data that was represented to be a proxy for world temperature often was not. The book is encyclopedic in its discussion of the hockey stick hoax. Yet the book is very well written and understandable.

Mr. Montford also points out the hockey stick instigators and the climate journals they wrote for very often refused to provide independent researchers with the data and/or methodology for the articles in support of the hockey stick. Independent researchers had to put much time and effort into their efforts to replicate or at least partially replicate the statistical results of the hockey stick purveyors. Mr.
Read more ›
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again

Product Images from Customers

Most Recent Customer Reviews

Search
ARRAY(0xa8100b30)