And another:

Q: Is the rate of global temperature rise over the last 100 years faster than at any time during the past 11,300 years?

A: Our study did not directly address this question because the paleotemperature records used in our study have a temporal resolution of ~120 years on average, which precludes us from examining variations in rates of change occurring within a century. Other factors also contribute to smoothing the proxy temperature signals contained in many of the records we used, such as organisms burrowing through deep-sea mud, and chronological uncertainties in the proxy records that tend to smooth the signals when compositing them into a globally averaged reconstruction. We showed that no temperature variability is preserved in our reconstruction at cycles shorter than 300 years, 50% is preserved at 1000-year time scales, and nearly all is preserved at 2000-year periods and longer. Our Monte-Carlo analysis accounts for these sources of uncertainty to yield a robust (albeit smoothed) global record. Any small “upticks” or “downticks” in temperature that last less than several hundred years in our compilation of paleoclimate data are probably not robust, as stated in the paper."

SPQR:"You’re a bit slow off the mark. Isn’t this the same report Poirot was crowing about here"

Not so slow...I actually referred to the earlier thread when I wrote.." Within OLO a thread entitled "Too Fast" was started to celebrate the breakthrough paper."

As Churchill said "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."

Now I'm not saying Marcott et al is a lie but the same dynamics apply. The paper was issued and the spin was touted by the authors and in all the usual publications, long before the basis of the paper could be analysed. Its only now that people like McIntyre have been able to pull it apart that the authors are backtracking on their original claims. What I'm most interested here is seeing just how many of the publications, blogs etc that carried the original dire warnings, now report the fact that the authors are looking to add all sorts of caveats to their pronouncements.

Finally for anyone still interested, there are a host of articles and comments out there on the usual blogs. But I rather like some of the discussion at Curry's place.

http://judithcurry.com/2013/04/02/were-not-screwed/

And as far as skeptics go, I like TonyB's explorations. Can't comment on how good they are, but fascinating just the same. Some examples:

http://climatereason.com/LittleIceAgeThermometers/
http://climatereason.com/Graphs/Graph01.png

And for some really out there and engaging discussions with a solid skeptical flavour, Tallbloke's blog is great.

http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/

I am particularly intrigued by their support for the Nikolov & Zeller proposition. It works for me at the Occams Razor level as opposed to the convoluted reasoning in standard greenhouse gas theory.

mhaze thats exactly my point. Marcott et al is NOT about recent warming, it's a good paper exploring the holocene temperature profile. Their mistake was adding that stupid uptick and I'll bet you we know where that came from. The paper is agreed by most to be very good apart from that.

But it's the unseemly haste with which the uptick was seized by all and sundry as proof of AGW that is most telling. Just like it is with Poirot.

Poirot says "I suppose it's nice to have a hobby, but hunting down and thrashing hockey sticks is so passe these days".

I think it is very sporting of your B grade global warming harpy scientists to keep setting up all these poorly contrived hokey sticks.

Tearing them to pieces gives the boys something fun to do, on those long cold nights, & lets them show everyone what a bunch of pretenders those still pushing the fraud really are.

Hey guys,

Nice to know there's another "skeptic" here to swell the ranks, who appears to have come stocked with compendium listing "skeptic" sites.

OLO's nearly as solid with deniers as Watts and Nova.

I'm sure you'll all be much happier if I sit on the sidelines and take notes (There's enough material [here] for an entire conference)

Have fun.....