Sliming Nick Stokes

Nick has obfuscated the issue by misrepresenting the original article, by failing to provide the quotes from the original authors stating that the series could not be used for paleoclimate of the last millennium.

In a thread where all we have about a “new paper” is an abstract, no less.

Let’s see how this claim fares by looking at the relevant quote:

The multiproxy approach used in this study highlights the interplay of ontogenetic processes (e.g. marine isolation, catchment maturation, soil and lake development, plant colonization) with overarching climatic factors (e.g. early Holocene aridity, Neoglacial cooling). Anthropogenic influences, which began with the Norse colonization around 1000 AD, preclude paleo-climatic interpretation during the last millennium.

The authors do not state anything about “the series”. The sentence before “preclude” refers to their “multiproxy approach”. The paleo-climatic interpretation may very well refer to the multiproxy approach. According to this reading, what is precluded from a paleo-climatic interpretation during the last millenium is the multiproxy approach the authors use.

Read More

(Source: climateaudit.org)

(I’ve told this sroty a few times)

The Auditor, acknowledging a trick to create never ending audits.
In the 1970s a government think-tank headed by Scarfolk councillor E. Bernays predicted that 21st century Britain might see a much-increased elderly population. Already faced with a recession, the government decided on a two-pronged solution that would not only reduce the numbers of future senior citizens but also boost the economy.

Dear Willard: Who Needs Words When One Has Letters and Operators?

[Just discovered this post by Ron Broberg dedicated to me. Reproduced with slight editing.]

Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis (Feb 2013)

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/

Regarding ad homininum (circumstantial) [1]

Let X be AGW

  1. Person A makes claim ~X.
  2. Person B asserts that A makes claim ~X because it is in A’s interest to claim ~X.
  3. Therefore claim ~X is false.

If Person B’s assertion is that ~X is false simply because the persons surveyed are petroleum engineers, I agree that argument is fallacious.

But there is a deeper problem.

Read More

(Source: rhinohide.wordpress.com)

The Ghost of Present ClimateBall ™

A guest post at and Then There’s Physics, whereby it is shown that the Auditor is the fiercest player in ClimateBall (tm) history.

How to Set the Scientific Record Straight

[A lesson in ombudsmanship.]

Mr. Watts: Just to set the scientific record straight, you are misinterpreting the “17 years” statement in the 2011 Santer et al. JGR paper. That statement was based on an analysis of CMIP-3 control runs, with no changes in external forcings. This is clearly stated in paragraph [30] of the 2011 Santer et al. paper:

Read More

(Source: wattsupwiththat.com)

Mr. Chairman, in your opening statement you claim that Dr. Mann’s hockey stick report of 1999 was the basis for the Kyoto Accord. According to my recollection, Kyoto was in 1997, so it could not have been the basis for the Kyoto Accord.

MR. STUPAK, a little bewildered about the fact that the committee is holding its very first hearing on global warming to referee a dispute over a 1999 hockey stick graph of global temperatures for the past millennium.

Sticking It to the Science

[Hank Roberts recalls an exchange between Dr. Koonin, Dr. Held, and Dr. Curry.]

DR. KOONIN: All right. I have got to say, I come away, Bill, and thanks for being so clear, that this business is even more uncertain than I thought…

[…]

DR. HELD: I think you are getting the concept of radiative forcing wrong.

DR. KOONIN: Thank you. Please tell me.

Read More

Well Done

[Howard poes Sir Rud.]

Nic and Judy, well done. A triumph of science in an age of self-serving greed. This topic is the perfect segue for me to promote my new book in which I explain how the world works from my perceptive point of view behind a computer in an undisclosed bunker deep under the Saskatchewan crust. In my book, available at http://www.infowars.com, I explain complex non linear partial differential equations for my kindergarten clients.

(Source: judithcurry.com)

Older posts RSS