We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
‘AGW is in fact now an industry (as well as a religion) and your insistence upon peer-reviewed papers makes me smile because there seems to be a preponderance of reviewers from within the AGW industry. Why do I think of the expression “Scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours”?"
Money managers do this sort of thing all the time for marketing purposes. To make their performance look good, they pick their start point and their end point based on what the chart looks like. Then they decide whether to include or exclude new money or new accounts from the data, depending on what looks best. Etc.
Speaking of how to lie with graphs - what is not explained is what the decline actually was.
The 'decline' had to do with a negative correlation between tree ring data and other means of assessing climate. The tree ring data coincided with other means quite well up to the 1960s, after which, for reasons not understood at this time, tree ring data and the other means of assessing climate diverged.
For 'politically centrist' Yankees, the invective and reactionary commentary here seems far more in line with Beckian zealotry than anything else.