>>11702897>a hockey stick
Perhaps you're seen this graph or something similar before. It's the Marcott Hockey Stick
Marcott shifted 2 cores (with negative values) so that they occurred just barely outside the closing period, and shifted 3 cores (with positive values) of years 1000, 690 and 510 years later than their published dates to “0 BP”. Straight-up academic malfeasance.
By fabricating new core top dates different than those expressly noted in the proxy papers themselves, a clearer case of explicit formal misconduct involving data falsification does not exist.
The Marcott et. al. reconstruction is not simply a mistake. It is an intentional distortion and a lie, fabricated in order to further an agenda.
As Roger Pielke Jr. generously wrote, after describing it as "another ugly episode for climate science":
"Arguments over data and methods are the lifeblood of science, and are not instances of misconduct. However, here I document the gross misrepresentation of the findings of a recent scientific paper via press release which appears to skirt awfully close to crossing the line into research misconduct, as defined by the NRC."
The take away: The only way Mann, Marcott and their ilk manage to produce Hockey Sticks are by biasing the proxy selection, altering the weights, or shifting them in time or polarity. Proxies lack the resolution and dynamics of modern temperature records, and should never be spliced together. When you see a Hockey Stick, you're being conned.