Methodology behind the Real Climate Change Science Hockey Stick Graph
You’ll recall the groundbreaking announcement we made in our post Another Climate Change Science Hockey Stick Graph where we revealed the alarming hockey-stick shaped incline in the number of climate change scientists practising in the world today. In that post we suggested that if the trends continued the numbers were unsustainable.
Yesterday we intercepted, stole, had leaked to us, received the following from a climate change expert specialising in the effects of global warming on the passage and speed of projectiles fired from devices styled in the medieval warming period. Speaking to deniers like Jonny King, Murray Hill writes:
As the author of the graph I can assure all that the methodology was rigorous and pew reviewed by another employee whose job depended on giving the right answer. The so-called “Medieval Learning” was accounted for; however we were able to “adjust” for this by offsetting the aberrant data because of the Medieval “bloody stupid’ period as exemplified by the excommunication of Galileo and the burning of housewives for the excessive use of condiments on the pretext of witchcraft.
In this manner were able to hide the incline of total climatologist numbers.
The learning is settled and 99% of graph makers in the direct employ of the Society for Making Graphs That Show What We Want Them To are in agreement that this graph is accurate. The other 1% is on academic probation for independent thought and may need psychiatric evaluation.
In: Contributors, political, theology
