http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTBiMTRlMDQxNzEyMmRhZjU3ZmYzODI5MGY4ZWI5OWM=&w=MA== The report goes unto say that eventually Jones simply said "storage technology in the 80's was not sufficient for the data" when in fact the statistician has used and discovered tape drives containing data from 1979. I'm familiar with McKitrick's work on this, he is a numbers cruncher whose last discovery was the fact the data had been incorrectly compiled and the mid 1930's had 4 out of the 5 hotest years on record, not the mid to late 90's as was claimed. Small wonder Jones did not wish to expose his "source" research to such scrutiny.
That is disturbing but we still have some pretty substantial evidence and data -- The record of observed temperatures are still being maintained by NOAA and similar organizations in Europe and Asia and, by most accounts (pictures, measurements, etc) a majority of glaciers are still melting at an alarming rate.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/29/yamal_scandal/ From the Pofo thread, courtesy of HOF13. Disturbing indeed. I just want both sides to play fair, so we have our answer and act accordingly.
Scientist: Carbon Dioxide Doesn't Cause Global Warming A noted geologist who coauthored the New York Times bestseller Sugar Busters has turned his attention to convincing Congress that carbon dioxide emissions are good for the Earth and don't cause global warming. Leighton Steward is on Capitol Hill this week armed with studies and his book Fire, Ice and Paradise in a bid to show senators working on the energy bill that the carbon dioxide cap-and-trade scheme could actually hurt the environment by reducing CO2 levels. "I'm trying to kill the whole thing," he says. "We are tilting at windmills." He is meeting with several GOP lawmakers and has plans to meet with some Democrats later this week. Much of the global warming debate has focused on reducing CO2 emissions because it is thought that the greenhouse gas produced mostly from fossil fuels is warming the planet. But Steward, who once believed CO2 caused global warming, is trying to fight that with a mountain of studies and scientific evidence that suggest CO2 is not the cause for warming. What's more, he says CO2 levels are so low that more, not less, is needed to sustain and expand plant growth.
all that may be true but to say we (Humans) are the cause is ridiculous. Not enough data exists to make such a claim. Comparing only 200 years of data, or several decades, when the planet is 4 billion years old is complete hogwash.
That piece of data is completely ridiculous. It does not matter at all. In fact at best the last million years actually matter since the first 3 billion years or so the earth was a much different place. And in the last billion the year was also very different, just less different than the first 3 billion years. Also from what I understand of statistics 200 years is a pretty good amount of data for the climate that we actually care about. The climate where humans can actually live.
we are talking 1/2 degree and people have their panties all in a wad. No 200 years is not enough!!!!!! two hundred years is like comparing a nano second to your lifetime. You cannot say for sure that humans are the cause. the average temperatures each year vary. Always have and always will. Weather is not an exact science. To try to make it one is naive. Too many factors cause the difference in temperature and the different weather patterns. Not enough data exists to recreate what it was in 1820. Anyone that claims different is a liar. Just like there is not enough data to say that it cooled down either. they can come close +/- 3 or 4 degrees. But to say with absolute certainty and within 1/2 degree is reaching big time. But like the election.....no matter what is said you will always have believers regardless what the facts are Hell they gave Obama a nobel prize today based on "good intentions" sh*t anything's possible
That is not true at all. You are including a lot of years that for the most part no one cares about. It does not matter what happened when earth was frozen over or when it was a HUGE ball of melted rock being slammed in constantly by meteors.
The problem is, the foundation for the claims about a rise in global temperatures, scientific studies based on archived data, can no longer be fact checked, in fact it can never be fact checked by the people who already found several errors in their studies. The originator of the study said point blank that even if they still had the data, they would not turn it over for review because "you would try to prove it was incorrect". Well...duh, that is supposed to be the basis of Scientific Claims, accuracy, check it once or 500 times, the answer is still the same, in this case there is no such accuracy and it boils down to a big "Trust us"..
Welcome to climate science Padre. I've been saying for a long, long time, that the scientific method has not been alive and well in this field. Nor has the peer review process ever been alive and well at the IPCC. This kind of crap is not new at all, and has been going on since the beginning.
Not sure where your going with this one. Do you know what the scientific method even is? Do you understand the steps or stages used in a scientific endeavor? Or really, as I've posted in the past, the steps that every other scientific discipline enjoys, but is viciously opposed in climate science today?
Glaciers are melting, average air and sea temperatures are rising, yet there are still are fools who dip deeply into the "what evidence" pool of horse crap.
Well, sure. They've been rising since we came out of the little ice age. "What evidence" (that isn't a pool of horse crap?) is there that any recent increases have been tied mainly to CO2 emissions? Nice article here: EXACTLY WHAT ARE THE CLIMATE CHANGE “DENIERS” DENYING? http://www.secalgarynews.com/homepage/exactly-what-are-the-climate-change-deniers-denying/
