Scientists Admit to AGW Pause, lol

[orogenicman]

The ocean is dragging that heat away from Mann's tree ring.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

If you believe that, then you don't understand how dendrochronology works.

Oh I know how it works. Much like Madame LaFevre reading tea leaves..

I think that I shall never see -- a thermometer as bad as a tree.
Same for the length of snail mud tubes. Most proxies are CRUDE at best. But AGW pretends to divine ultra-precise messages from them..

Like I said, you don't understand how it works. Reading nursery rhymes isn't helping your argument.

 

[flacaltenn]

If you believe that, then you don't understand how dendrochronology works.

Oh I know how it works. Much like Madame LaFevre reading tea leaves..

I think that I shall never see -- a thermometer as bad as a tree.
Same for the length of snail mud tubes. Most proxies are CRUDE at best. But AGW pretends to divine ultra-precise messages from them..

Like I said, you don't understand how it works. Reading nursery rhymes isn't helping your argument.

Nursery rhyme Twas not mine.. But I love it anyway and it's fitting since I don't see you claiming any science known as dendrothermography.. Seems like trees need a BUNCH of variables to be happy campers.. And as thermometers --- they really suck... At least to discerning the MWPeriod beyond +/-2degC. Unless --- you just have the correct woodworking skills like Briffa seems to have.

 

[orogenicman]

Oh I know how it works. Much like Madame LaFevre reading tea leaves..

I think that I shall never see -- a thermometer as bad as a tree.
Same for the length of snail mud tubes. Most proxies are CRUDE at best. But AGW pretends to divine ultra-precise messages from them..

Like I said, you don't understand how it works. Reading nursery rhymes isn't helping your argument.

Nursery rhyme Twas not mine.. But I love it anyway and it's fitting since I don't see you claiming any science known as dendrothermography.. Seems like trees need a BUNCH of variables to be happy campers.. And as thermometers --- they really suck... At least to discerning the MWPeriod beyond +/-2degC. Unless --- you just have the correct woodworking skills like Briffa seems to have.

Yeah, if we are talking about one tree, or even a group of trees in one forest, that's a problem. But with Marcott we are talking about 73 proxies taken from all over the planet, proxies that are largely in good agreement with one another. And that's a higher order of data altogether. Please, do ignore it, and/or ridicule it at your own expense. I just have to laugh at your responses, because that's all they deserve.

 

[flacaltenn]

Like I said, you don't understand how it works. Reading nursery rhymes isn't helping your argument.

Nursery rhyme Twas not mine.. But I love it anyway and it's fitting since I don't see you claiming any science known as dendrothermography.. Seems like trees need a BUNCH of variables to be happy campers.. And as thermometers --- they really suck... At least to discerning the MWPeriod beyond +/-2degC. Unless --- you just have the correct woodworking skills like Briffa seems to have.

Yeah, if we are talking about one tree, or even a group of trees in one forest, that's a problem. But with Marcott we are talking about 73 proxies taken from all over the planet, proxies that are largely in good agreement with one another. And that's a higher order of data altogether. Please, do ignore it, and/or ridicule it at your own expense. I just have to laugh at your responses, because that's all they deserve.

Well now wait a minute. Don't get all hysterical yet.. Let's chat about it..

The accepted surface temp record is a product of some 8,000 thermometers worldwide. (I lose count of the actual inventory as it varies everytime GISS chucks a few or adds a bunch). So these proxies tact onto a fairly widely sampled GLOBAL average.

EVEN IF I DID accept the ability of alkanones or tree rings to discern fractions of a degF, How am I supposed to buy that these REALLY REALLY SPARSE sample sets of EACH class represent a 10,000 year history over the entire FREAKING globe with any resolution?
After all --- the final product is being presented with the implication that it represents GLOBAL SURFACE AVERAGE and to a similiar time and temperature resolution as the Common Warming period data..

 

[orogenicman]

Nursery rhyme Twas not mine.. But I love it anyway and it's fitting since I don't see you claiming any science known as dendrothermography.. Seems like trees need a BUNCH of variables to be happy campers.. And as thermometers --- they really suck... At least to discerning the MWPeriod beyond +/-2degC. Unless --- you just have the correct woodworking skills like Briffa seems to have.

Yeah, if we are talking about one tree, or even a group of trees in one forest, that's a problem. But with Marcott we are talking about 73 proxies taken from all over the planet, proxies that are largely in good agreement with one another. And that's a higher order of data altogether. Please, do ignore it, and/or ridicule it at your own expense. I just have to laugh at your responses, because that's all they deserve.

Well now wait a minute. Don't get all hysterical yet.. Let's chat about it..

The accepted surface temp record is a product of some 8,000 thermometers worldwide. (I lose count of the actual inventory as it varies everytime GISS chucks a few or adds a bunch). So these proxies tact onto a fairly widely sampled GLOBAL average.

EVEN IF I DID accept the ability of alkanones or tree rings to discern fractions of a degF, How am I supposed to buy that these REALLY REALLY SPARSE sample sets of EACH class represent a 10,000 year history over the entire FREAKING globe with any resolution?
After all --- the final product is being presented with the implication that it represents GLOBAL SURFACE AVERAGE and to a similiar time and temperature resolution as the Common Warming period data..

Because these 73 proxies represent thousands of trees and other cores from all over the planet, not just one small track of forest, say, in Siberia. And these proxies are each calibrated against one another, and at the most recent end, against the modern temperature measurement data. And the fact is that it is the best reconstruction available. Keep in mind that no one is preventing you from getting out there and conducting your own original research. But I guess that really would be asking too much, wouldn't it?

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL. The "Conservative" fruitloops here are incapable of even discerning on an internet search what is valid science, and what is flap-yap from unqualified idiots with an agenda.

 

[JimBowie1958]

If you believe that, then you don't understand how dendrochronology works.

Oh I know how it works. Much like Madame LaFevre reading tea leaves..

I think that I shall never see -- a thermometer as bad as a tree.
Same for the length of snail mud tubes. Most proxies are CRUDE at best. But AGW pretends to divine ultra-precise messages from them..

Like I said, you don't understand how it works. Reading nursery rhymes isn't helping your argument.

There is NOTHING to understand that would justify three or four orders of magnitude precision when taking proxies off a frigging tree.

 

[JimBowie1958]

LOL. The "Conservative" fruitloops here are incapable of even discerning on an internet search what is valid science, and what is flap-yap from unqualified idiots with an agenda.

Oh, you mean like the idiots that corrected NASA's bad temperature adjustments a few years ago?

Or the idiots that make the technology that the government then takes off the shelf for its own use?

Yeah, real idiots there, doc.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Yeah, if we are talking about one tree, or even a group of trees in one forest, that's a problem. But with Marcott we are talking about 73 proxies taken from all over the planet, proxies that are largely in good agreement with one another. And that's a higher order of data altogether. Please, do ignore it, and/or ridicule it at your own expense. I just have to laugh at your responses, because that's all they deserve.

Well now wait a minute. Don't get all hysterical yet.. Let's chat about it..

The accepted surface temp record is a product of some 8,000 thermometers worldwide. (I lose count of the actual inventory as it varies everytime GISS chucks a few or adds a bunch). So these proxies tact onto a fairly widely sampled GLOBAL average.

EVEN IF I DID accept the ability of alkanones or tree rings to discern fractions of a degF, How am I supposed to buy that these REALLY REALLY SPARSE sample sets of EACH class represent a 10,000 year history over the entire FREAKING globe with any resolution?
After all --- the final product is being presented with the implication that it represents GLOBAL SURFACE AVERAGE and to a similiar time and temperature resolution as the Common Warming period data..

Because these 73 proxies represent thousands of trees and other cores from all over the planet, not just one small track of forest, say, in Siberia. And these proxies are each calibrated against one another, and at the most recent end, against the modern temperature measurement data. And the fact is that it is the best reconstruction available. Keep in mind that no one is preventing you from getting out there and conducting your own original research. But I guess that really would be asking too much, wouldn't it?

So if tree ring proxies are so accurate, THEN WHY DO THEY SHOW THE EARTH COOLING OVER THE LAST FEW DECADES, eh Einstein? That is what the 'hide the decline' scandal was all about, dude.

 

[daveman]

McIntyre has a long history of just getting it wrong, and has no expertize whatsoever in climate science. Are you certain you want to pin your hopes on his unpublished rants?

Are you sure you want to pin your hopes on one cherry-picked tree?

Ooops. You already have.

 

[daveman]

LOL. The "Conservative" fruitloops here are incapable of even discerning on an internet search what is valid science, and what is flap-yap from unqualified idiots with an agenda.

I forget -- what's your degree in?

Oh, that's right. You don't HAVE a degree.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The ocean is dragging that heat away from Mann's tree ring.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

If you believe that, then you don't understand how dendrochronology works.

So the tree rings don't measure Global Warming?

Have you told Michael Mann and Princeton about this?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

McIntyre has a long history of just getting it wrong, and has no expertize whatsoever in climate science. Are you certain you want to pin your hopes on his unpublished rants?

Doesn't Mann have a date in court up in Canada where he can lay his case out?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Mann's Nature trick"

"hide the decline"

"We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy..."

 

[flacaltenn]

Yeah, if we are talking about one tree, or even a group of trees in one forest, that's a problem. But with Marcott we are talking about 73 proxies taken from all over the planet, proxies that are largely in good agreement with one another. And that's a higher order of data altogether. Please, do ignore it, and/or ridicule it at your own expense. I just have to laugh at your responses, because that's all they deserve.

Well now wait a minute. Don't get all hysterical yet.. Let's chat about it..

The accepted surface temp record is a product of some 8,000 thermometers worldwide. (I lose count of the actual inventory as it varies everytime GISS chucks a few or adds a bunch). So these proxies tact onto a fairly widely sampled GLOBAL average.

EVEN IF I DID accept the ability of alkanones or tree rings to discern fractions of a degF, How am I supposed to buy that these REALLY REALLY SPARSE sample sets of EACH class represent a 10,000 year history over the entire FREAKING globe with any resolution?
After all --- the final product is being presented with the implication that it represents GLOBAL SURFACE AVERAGE and to a similiar time and temperature resolution as the Common Warming period data..

Because these 73 proxies represent thousands of trees and other cores from all over the planet, not just one small track of forest, say, in Siberia. And these proxies are each calibrated against one another, and at the most recent end, against the modern temperature measurement data. And the fact is that it is the best reconstruction available. Keep in mind that no one is preventing you from getting out there and conducting your own original research. But I guess that really would be asking too much, wouldn't it?

I AM in fact "doing my own original research".. In fact, I'm looking forward to a self-financed sabbatical to go back to academia, take the demotion, swallow my pride and doing a revision of Trenberths "energy" diagram.. I'm also currently working on how and why the IPCC has hidden a 1.2W/m2 Total Solar Insolation increase since 1750.

I know defending Marcott and Briffa and the proxies is an overwhelming task -- But your logic above is quite Kindergarten.

Some trees "REPRESENTING" the entire world eh? How about I stick a couple thermometers in Corpus Christy and claim it represents America? And for good measure, I'll stash a couple armadillos in Kobe Japan and measure the length of their scales... Just have to wait 10,000 years, substitute a couple dozen diff proxies at similiar sites..

Calibrated to each other? eh? No -- more like homogenized to agree with instrument records in the current era.. Taking proxies with 6 and 8degC OFFSETS and harmonizing them so that they all meet up to thermometer measurements in the 20th century -- is NOT calibration..

Look -- I don't mind historical reconstructions. Some of the proxies are quite clever. But to PRETEND that you are assessing a GLOBAL reconstruction of temp -- accurate to less than a small fraction of a degC --- is EXACTLY why there are camps of MILLIONS of intelligient science-capable sceptics worldwide..

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yeah, if we are talking about one tree, or even a group of trees in one forest, that's a problem. But with Marcott we are talking about 73 proxies taken from all over the planet, proxies that are largely in good agreement with one another. And that's a higher order of data altogether. Please, do ignore it, and/or ridicule it at your own expense. I just have to laugh at your responses, because that's all they deserve.

Well now wait a minute. Don't get all hysterical yet.. Let's chat about it..

The accepted surface temp record is a product of some 8,000 thermometers worldwide. (I lose count of the actual inventory as it varies everytime GISS chucks a few or adds a bunch). So these proxies tact onto a fairly widely sampled GLOBAL average.

EVEN IF I DID accept the ability of alkanones or tree rings to discern fractions of a degF, How am I supposed to buy that these REALLY REALLY SPARSE sample sets of EACH class represent a 10,000 year history over the entire FREAKING globe with any resolution?
After all --- the final product is being presented with the implication that it represents GLOBAL SURFACE AVERAGE and to a similiar time and temperature resolution as the Common Warming period data..

Because these 73 proxies represent thousands of trees and other cores from all over the planet, not just one small track of forest, say, in Siberia. And these proxies are each calibrated against one another, and at the most recent end, against the modern temperature measurement data. And the fact is that it is the best reconstruction available. Keep in mind that no one is preventing you from getting out there and conducting your own original research. But I guess that really would be asking too much, wouldn't it?

Glad you mentioned cores

CO2 LAGS temperature in these cores

LAGS

Meaning when it gets warmer (we're up 8 degrees these past 14,000 years) CO2 increases

 

[orogenicman]

Well now wait a minute. Don't get all hysterical yet.. Let's chat about it..

The accepted surface temp record is a product of some 8,000 thermometers worldwide. (I lose count of the actual inventory as it varies everytime GISS chucks a few or adds a bunch). So these proxies tact onto a fairly widely sampled GLOBAL average.

EVEN IF I DID accept the ability of alkanones or tree rings to discern fractions of a degF, How am I supposed to buy that these REALLY REALLY SPARSE sample sets of EACH class represent a 10,000 year history over the entire FREAKING globe with any resolution?
After all --- the final product is being presented with the implication that it represents GLOBAL SURFACE AVERAGE and to a similiar time and temperature resolution as the Common Warming period data..

Because these 73 proxies represent thousands of trees and other cores from all over the planet, not just one small track of forest, say, in Siberia. And these proxies are each calibrated against one another, and at the most recent end, against the modern temperature measurement data. And the fact is that it is the best reconstruction available. Keep in mind that no one is preventing you from getting out there and conducting your own original research. But I guess that really would be asking too much, wouldn't it?

Glad you mentioned cores

CO2 LAGS temperature in these cores

LAGS

Meaning when it gets warmer (we're up 8 degrees these past 14,000 years) CO2 increases

Do you want to know why it lags?

 

[Mushroom]

If you believe that, then you don't understand how dendrochronology works.

Oh I know how it works. Much like Madame LaFevre reading tea leaves..

I think that I shall never see -- a thermometer as bad as a tree.
Same for the length of snail mud tubes. Most proxies are CRUDE at best. But AGW pretends to divine ultra-precise messages from them..

Like I said, you don't understand how it works. Reading nursery rhymes isn't helping your argument.

Wow, and when did Joyce Kilmer write nursery rhymes?

 

[Mushroom]

LOL. The "Conservative" fruitloops here are incapable of even discerning on an internet search what is valid science, and what is flap-yap from unqualified idiots with an agenda.

Oh, we do discern it - and that is what a great many people simply do not loike.

I have made many very simple requests over the last few years, ones that are almost universally ignored. And they are really ver simple:

What caused the Medieval Warm Period, and what made it end?
What caused the Little Ice Age, and what made it end?
Why are we accepting as a "standard temperature" a temperature that was established in the middle of one of the coldest periods in the last 2,000 years?
What happened to the wet marshlands of North Africa?
What happened to the fertile crescent?
What happened to the large inland wetlands in what is now Death Valley?

These are all examples of some rather drastic climate changes, that all happened within the last 10,000 years. Yet we are supposed to now suddenly believe that the climate should never change again, and that although it has changed from snowball to hothouse to snowball again, any changes made today just have to be "man made".

That is why I reject this entire lunacy.

 

[orogenicman]

LOL. The "Conservative" fruitloops here are incapable of even discerning on an internet search what is valid science, and what is flap-yap from unqualified idiots with an agenda.

Oh, we do discern it - and that is what a great many people simply do not loike (sic).

No, I don't think you do. Otherwise, you would be referencing peer reviewed scientific research conducted by certified scientists fully qualified in their fields of expertize instead of referencing politically motivated pseudoscience blogs written by message therapists, creationists, and accountants.