For Crick- New Pages2k Data Paper

Ian, Thanks for the excercise. I see that crick is just a jiminie and nothing more. the individual is a pure adolescent. Anyone reading this exercise could only make one observation, complete lack of cooperation from a flaming jiminie idiot. Thank you!!

thanks jc.

I will give an example of the typical response to McIntyre from the elite guard of the warmers. First they scoff and ridicule. then they make up a bandaid excuse for laymen to think he has been refuted while the other scientists in climate science seemingly just avert their eyes. then after a few years they publish a new paper that incorporates the McIntyre correction with no acknowledgement. the public usually did not hear the original criticism and simply thinks science is moving forward.

eg. Briffa has been producing treering paleo reconstructions for decades and McIntyre has been poking holes in them. in 2009 Briffa was finally forced to release his data and McIntrye jumped on the opportunity to show what the reconstruction should actually look like. Briffa and the hockey team lashed out with ad homs and ridiculed McIntrye's use of 'data found on the internet'. in 2012 Briffa released his latest study and, sure enough, it looked exactly like the correction McIntyre produced earlier.

this latest Pages2K paper has also incorporated some of the criticisms leveled by Climmate Audit, but not before AR5 used the faulty data for its report. there are other problems left in Pages2K that may or may not be corrected in the future. only time will tell but you can be sure that McIntyre will not be given credit for finding them.

I could go on and on giving examples but it has been writen here before. crick is doing himself a disservice by not getting the information available as to why 'climate science is NOT settled'. he also doesnt understand that many of the changes in climate science are being forced by legitimate criticisms by the 'deniers'. his precious climate sensitivity of 2-4.5C has been trashed by over a dozen papers in the last couple of years that show it to be under 2C. every new paleo reconstruction shows a larger MWP and lower LIA. CO2 seems to be more correlated to the homogenization adjustments than to being the control knob for climate.

rant off/
 
AGWCult is a Tree Ring Circus


no shit. the tree identified as YAD031 was a six sigma outlier in a group of less than twenty trees. how can they defend using it, and why would they think it was temperature that caused the growth spurt. wouldnt a tree falling over that had been blocking the sunlight be a more reasonable explanation? or something else?
 
AGWCult is a Tree Ring Circus


no shit. the tree identified as YAD031 was a six sigma outlier in a group of less than twenty trees. how can they defend using it, and why would they think it was temperature that caused the growth spurt. wouldnt a tree falling over that had been blocking the sunlight be a more reasonable explanation? or something else?

mann_treering.jpg


"Look under my pinky for the Global Warming"

90% of the warming get eaten by the oceans, odd considering the oceans only cover 70% of the planet. They must be really hungry
 
After McIntyre was so involved in the Wegman fraud, he lost the last bit of his credibility. You know, when Wegmen claimed Mann's method always made hockey sticks even with random data. Except Wegman didn't use random data, he used non-detrended red noise with hockey stick built in, and then he cherrypicked the 1% of the results that looked most hockey-stick like, and he failed to mention half his results were reverse hockey sticks. Plus there was the plagiarism thing, and the pal review scandal. Other than that, it was perfect.

To the CultofMcIntyre, however, none of that matters. DearLeader is infallible, no matter how much of a clown he is.
 
After McIntyre was so involved in the Wegman fraud, he lost the last bit of his credibility. You know, when Wegmen claimed Mann's method always made hockey sticks even with random data. Except Wegman didn't use random data, he used non-detrended red noise with hockey stick built in, and then he cherrypicked the 1% of the results that looked most hockey-stick like, and he failed to mention half his results were reverse hockey sticks. Plus there was the plagiarism thing, and the pal review scandal. Other than that, it was perfect.

To the CultofMcIntyre, however, none of that matters. DearLeader is infallible, no matter how much of a clown he is.
do you have anything to say of importance? I didn't think so, thank you and have a nice day. Listen and hear the crickets!!!! :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin: :badgrin:
 
After McIntyre was so involved in the Wegman fraud, he lost the last bit of his credibility. You know, when Wegmen claimed Mann's method always made hockey sticks even with random data. Except Wegman didn't use random data, he used non-detrended red noise with hockey stick built in, and then he cherrypicked the 1% of the results that looked most hockey-stick like, and he failed to mention half his results were reverse hockey sticks. Plus there was the plagiarism thing, and the pal review scandal. Other than that, it was perfect.

To the CultofMcIntyre, however, none of that matters. DearLeader is infallible, no matter how much of a clown he is.


we have gone down this road before. Wegman is not McIntyre. McIntyre's method of using Monte Carlo statistics may not have been perfect but it was an order of magnitude more correct than Wahl's abortion of a defence of Mann.

Wegman's plagiarism was his postdoc's use of wiki boilerplate general information that Wegman didnt catch, and didnt think mattered because it is a common practise in many papers that use the same undocumented use of other's info as background. an interesting side note. Wegman's emails were released immediately, Mann's emails are still in the vault. some scientists are more equal than others, eh?
 
Hey crick- there has been lots more discussion over at Climate Audit on the type of proxies used in Pages2K, their strengths and weaknesses, the methodologies, and comparisons to other papers done in the field.

It strikes me as a bit cowardly on your part that you won't even read about what may be wrong. If nothing else you would at least find out what proxies are being used.
 
Ian, your cult leader isn't taken seriously by anyone outside the cult, due to his history of fudging and thug tactics. If you want to waste time with him, that's your choice, but it's delusional for you to expect that anyone else will be spending many hours trying to figure out how he hid the fudging this time around.
 
Ian, your cult leader isn't taken seriously by anyone outside the cult, due to his history of fudging and thug tactics. If you want to waste time with him, that's your choice, but it's delusional for you to expect that anyone else will be spending many hours trying to figure out how he hid the fudging this time around.
Yet here you are! hmmm.......
 
I think it is safe to say that there is probably no man feared more in climate science than Steve McIntyre. Just ask Gergis or Marcott. One had their accepted paper withdrawn, the other had to acknowledge that modern portion of his reconstruction had no validity.

Every time McIntyre exposes a mistake or forces data to be released to the public domain then science wins.
 
Hey crick- there has been lots more discussion over at Climate Audit on the type of proxies used in Pages2K, their strengths and weaknesses, the methodologies, and comparisons to other papers done in the field.

It strikes me as a bit cowardly on your part that you won't even read about what may be wrong. If nothing else you would at least find out what proxies are being used.

There are all manner of idiots all over this planet talking about all manner of different subjects. I can't listen to them all. The time you spend reading McIntyre could be spent reading someone who actually knows what they're talking about and isn't an egotistical jerk. We all have to make choices. I seem to be choosing to spend my time more usefully than do you.
 
hahaahhahhahahahahahahahahaahahahahhahahahahahahaha............................................
 
Unfortunately, for JC I think it's too late. The choices he's already made seem unrecoverable.
 
Hey crick- there has been lots more discussion over at Climate Audit on the type of proxies used in Pages2K, their strengths and weaknesses, the methodologies, and comparisons to other papers done in the field.

It strikes me as a bit cowardly on your part that you won't even read about what may be wrong. If nothing else you would at least find out what proxies are being used.

There are all manner of idiots all over this planet talking about all manner of different subjects. I can't listen to them all. The time you spend reading McIntyre could be spent reading someone who actually knows what they're talking about and isn't an egotistical jerk. We all have to make choices. I seem to be choosing to spend my time more usefully than do you.

The problem for your side is that McIntyre usually knows more about the data than the climate scientists. That's why it only makes sense to at least listen to his critiques.

As far as being egotistical, I think you would find it difficult to support that opinion by quoting the man's words.
 
We will have to agree to disagree on these points. I will not waste my time with Steve McIntyre
 
Unfortunately, for JC I think it's too late. The choices he's already made seem unrecoverable.
for yesterday, it was too late. Had to go home. But don't forget..........WiNNiNg...:woohoo:
 

Forum List

Back
Top