edthecynic
Censored for Cynicism
- Oct 20, 2008
- 43,044
- 6,883
- 1,830
Which gives you an average of impreciseness.Where the proxy data overlaps the direct instrument measurements, the proxy data is quite inaccurate. Proxy data is essentially worthless.Again comparing instrument record to the proxy record and calling it science.
Interesting spin on propaganda.
If you are looking to cherry pick data, then do so and call it what it is. If you are looking to consistantly measure a trend using consistanly collected data, then do that.
Mixing the two is just an exercise in salesmanship.
The thing about most proxy data is that it is imprecise exactly because it is an indirect measurement. Take tree-ring data, yes, warmer years tend to produce more growth (wider rings) than colder years, but there are also other factors that increase growth, such as more water, more CO2, etc.,. SOmetimes these factors work in conjunction to amplify each other, sometimes these factors are at odds with each other (ie a warm but dry season). That is why, the best pre-instrument assessments use lots of different types of proxies and then look for averages across the range.
But deniers use them as precise measurements to compare to direct instrument measurements and claim that temps were warmer in the past if the proxy data imprecisely says so.