|
Post by hunter on Nov 19, 2009 3:29:35 GMT
Exactly. In the real world, hiding data and methods in an accountable situation is pretty much an admission of scam. In AGW, by contrast, non-reproducible results, hidden data, non-disclosed methods are the norm. And calls for transparency are as welcome in the AGW community as they were at Bernie Madoff's shop.
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Nov 19, 2009 15:07:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 22, 2009 14:23:07 GMT
The CRU data now clearly shows that the "Hockey Stick" was junk science from the beginning. Not only were they using two proxies to meld the graph, they were politely warned that tree rings are a very poor indicator of temperature.
It is time to throw this one under the bus and start fresh.
|
|
|
Post by hunter on Nov 22, 2009 14:25:43 GMT
I was a reviewer of Gore's movie for a science writer. I stated at the time that Gore was selling something in his movie. I knew he was wrong, but I had no idea that the sales tools he was using were so fundamentally corrupt. Fact is far stranger than fiction. No wonder Mann is so mad all of the time. He has a huge load of guilt to cover up.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 27, 2009 2:43:00 GMT
www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=478here is a link to a rough analysis of the paper that Baliunas/Soon were going to publish to refute Mann etal. John Hodlren discouraged the publication....and he was very wrong to do so. It is so hard to believe how many people bought into the Mann reconstruction when the evidence is so strong for a MWP. Talk about poppy cock.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 27, 2009 2:55:55 GMT
memory getting more refreshed: The more I read about Mann etal love affair with tree ring proxies, the more upset I am getting. HOW IN THE WORLD
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 27, 2009 2:57:16 GMT
memory getting more refreshed: The more I read about Mann etal love affair with tree ring proxies, the more upset I am getting. HOW IN THE WORLD Could they keep ignoring the botanist view. Do they even ask a botonist what his thoughts would be on using a tree ring as a proxy for temperature? This is just getting stinkier all the time.
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Nov 27, 2009 4:00:01 GMT
You pick an area that a 6th grader will buy the "science" then exploit. Dosen't say much about the audiance does it. In my daughters 6th grade "science" class they brought up the "concept" of consenses. It was closely associated with the section on climate. They even wheeled out some Indian guy as the athority figure. The dumbing of science starts early. Dendro anyone, CRU anyone,Hockey anyone, maybe Daubi anyone. As an aside I got thrown out of my 7th grade science class for suggesting the the northern lights was caused by ionic discharge in the atmosphere caused by the solar wind, the teacher thought it was the reflection of the sun off the polar ice cap.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Nov 27, 2009 4:16:38 GMT
ya know ole fellow.....you turned out ok even if you had a rotten science teacher in the 7th grade.....LMAO
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 7, 2009 4:38:26 GMT
The hockey stick is DEAD.....the MWP happened.
|
|
|
Post by aj1983 on Dec 7, 2009 13:48:06 GMT
So from tree ring data you can't prove anything, but you can prove the MWP? There is some historical evidence of a MWP here in north western Europe and Greenland, but I'm not convinced that it was global, especially not because it seems to be a north Atlantic event. You will always find studies however saying that it was also warmer somewhere else, so it must be global! I'm wondering, temperatures have recently been much higher here than the IPCC "predicted" probably because of persistent Rossby wave patterns and more southerly winds. Also (probably not this time) it could have had something to do with the THC. The problem is that today it is very difficult to distinguish between natural variation and AGW induced variations. The exact changes induced by AGW are quite uncertain and controversial anyway. Even for an AGW "proponent" it is annoying to hear the media (and even some scientists who desperately need attention) blame everything on AGW, which is nothing more than bullshit propaganda which does not improve the science and scientific understanding of the public. It is sometimes quite frustrating to see a discussion of climate between two "scientists" here on national tv. The opponent is an economist, the other knows something about town planning (I don't know the english term for it.) . That would be about the same as a lawyer and me discussing about medicines or something we both don't understand.
|
|
|
Post by hairball on Dec 7, 2009 14:10:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Dec 7, 2009 14:10:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 7, 2009 14:14:09 GMT
So from tree ring data you can't prove anything, but you can prove the MWP? There is some historical evidence of a MWP here in north western Europe and Greenland, but I'm not convinced that it was global, especially not because it seems to be a north Atlantic event. You will always find studies however saying that it was also warmer somewhere else, so it must be global! I'm wondering, temperatures have recently been much higher here than the IPCC "predicted" probably because of persistent Rossby wave patterns and more southerly winds. Also (probably not this time) it could have had something to do with the THC. The problem is that today it is very difficult to distinguish between natural variation and AGW induced variations. The exact changes induced by AGW are quite uncertain and controversial anyway. Even for an AGW "proponent" it is annoying to hear the media (and even some scientists who desperately need attention) blame everything on AGW, which is nothing more than bullshit propaganda which does not improve the science and scientific understanding of the public. It is sometimes quite frustrating to see a discussion of climate between two "scientists" here on national tv. The opponent is an economist, the other knows something about town planning (I don't know the english term for it.) . That would be about the same as a lawyer and me discussing about medicines or something we both don't understand. There have been many studies showing the MWP was worldwide in nature. The tree ring thing was an attempt to dispute that, however it has failed miserably.
|
|
|
Post by steve on Dec 7, 2009 14:41:01 GMT
More correctly, there have been many studies showing that there was a difference in climate during the Medieval period that had worldwide impacts.
Some areas were warmer, and some were cooler. Apparently just up the road from one of the less successful Greenland colonies the climate started to cool as they arrived just prior to 1000AD. They were tough enough to stick it out till 1350. Now the site (Nuuk) is warm and habitable enough to support a thriving settlement.
|
|