Introduction: Revealing the Climate Myth
One of the most influential and deceptive climate graphics of today’s cycle does not stem from any peer-reviewed scientific publication.
Instead, after a thorough investigation, I traced its roots back to the 2018 activist document titled “Don't you mention the emergency?” Release by the Climate Emergency Statement Group. [emphasis, links added]
On page 7 of this document, Graphics sharply add up with modern tool temperature data, juxtaposing temperature-stable agent reconstructions with modern temperature data, mistakenly presenting today’s warming as unprecedented and shocking.
Further investigations show that this misleading graphic was inspired by a 2013 blog post “Marcott's Two Era” Changes from us.
This blog relies heavily on Marcott et al. (2013) Reconstruction, Clearly warn of the significant limitations of their data:
“We show that in our reconstruction, the cycles are shorter than 300 years, retaining 50% temperature variability on a 1000-year scale, almost all of which remain for 2000 and longer.”
Although Marcott explicitly acknowledges these key limitations, climate activists, media and even IPCC repeatedly adopted distorted visualization of this reconstruction, which fueled unreasonable alarms.
Why do authors and IPCC remain silent when encountering such obvious misuse of data?
My Investigation on Climate Data Manipulation
In a previous detailed analysis, I uncover similar deceptive practices highlighting fundamental flaws and intentional supervision in climate reconstruction.
In one article, I reveal how smoothing techniques eliminate natural climate change, artificially expanding modern warming.
Another survey rigorously examines the Speleothem agents in Moondyne Cave, Australia, highlighting the serious differences between agent-derived temperature records and instrumental measurements.
These inconsistencies question the reliability of widely cited climate reconstruction.
I also systematically evaluated alternative limitations: spanning ice, tree rings, corals, paleoplasm, and plant stomata, revealing serious uncertainty and inherent inaccuracies that undermine confidence claims about historical climatic conditions.
This comprehensive analysis consistently suggests that the statement of unprecedented warming relies on the explanation of serious flaws in proxy data.
Understand climate agent reconstruction
Climate agent reconstruction uses natural archives such as tree rings, ice cores, coral growth and cave strata (Speleothems) to estimate past climatic conditions before modern instruments.
These methods usually involve measuring stable isotopes, chemical composition, or growth patterns affected by environmental factors. However, agents inherently stabilize short-term climate fluctuations, predominantly retaining long-term trends.
For example, Marcott's reconstruction relies on sediment core and ice core isotope data, which are aggregated and statistically smooth, eliminating variability shorter than 300 years.
Therefore, today's short-term warming seems artificially exaggerated compared to these flush-smooth historical datasets.
Who can profit from climate shock?
The continuous deformation of climate data is not only accidental…it is actively motivated. Organizations like heavily funded IPCC, such as government agencies, environmentalist groups and private foundations, have vested interests in perpetuating crisis narratives.
Researchers' silence is often misrepresented, such as Marcott, which often reflects reliance on ongoing funding, resulting in a cycle of misinformation.
This systematic bias impairs scientific objectivity and transforms science into advocacy rather than impartial research.
Top photo of Femke screen on Platshsh
Irrational Fear is written by climatologist Dr. Matthew Wielicki and has been supported by readers. If you value what you read here, consider subscribing to and supporting the work there.
Reading for rest in irrational fear
