Global Warming for Dummies

[sasguru]

I'll give it a go

Goto 5. Read carefully until understood.

[AtW]

From a randomly googled thesaurus you pedantic dipstick.

Google is God.

enquiring minds - Did you mean: inquiring minds.

Don't believe me Google is right?

Try this SFW query: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=sasguru

...

Did you mean: sadguru

[AtW]

You truly are a mental midget AtW.

Yes, and you are an intellectual giant.

[sasguru]

Yes, and you are an intellectual giant.

Goto 5.

[shaunbhoy]

Goto 5.

Up your game sas. Try and aim for "depressingly tedious" as the main descriptor of your posts and work up from there. You are making AtW sound highbrow.

[sasguru]

Up your game sas. Try and aim for "depressingly tedious" as the main descriptor of your posts and work up from there. You are making AtW sound highbrow.

Goto 5.
HTH

[shaunbhoy]

Goto 5.
HTH

No better is it?
Taking "metronomically dull" to new depths.

[doodab]

void (*five)(void)  = 0x05;
(*five)();

[pjclarke]

Really should get out more

Here's the Hockey Stick, as used by Al Gore and the IPCC. When it was published, over a decade ago it was the first of its kind. I am sure that readers here are familiar with the concept of uncertainty ranges or 'error bars'. While the solid curve is the best estimate, the grey shaded area represents the uncertainty in the study . Guess how many of the numerous subsequent studies lie outside the uncertainty range of the Hockey Stick? None. Guess how many show a Medieval period warmer than today? None. This is why the US National Academy of Science panel convened to investigate the controversy reported

""The basic conclusion of Mann et al. (1998, 1999) was that the late 20th century warmth in the Northern Hemisphere was unprecedented during at least the last 1000 years. This conclusion has subsequently been supported by an array of evidence that includes both additional large-scale surface temperature reconstructions and pronounced changes in a variety of local proxy indicators, such as melting on ice caps and the retreat of glaciers around the world"

One thing you will never discover from Mr McIntyre is the impact his findings have on basic conclusions. In fact, conducting the study using the methods he favours shifts the graph just an insignificant 0.05C. Using centred or non-centred Principal Component Analysis gives a Hockey Stick - using no PCAs at all gives ..... a Hockey Stick.

I would also be very wary about relying on Christopher Booker as a source: this is a man whose scientific expertise is such that he insists white asbestos is chemically identical to talcum powder, a position not appreciated by the HSE.

[threaded]

Here's the Hockey Stick, as used by Al Gore and the IPCC. When it was published, over a decade ago it was the first of its kind. I am sure that readers here are familiar with the concept of uncertainty ranges or 'error bars'. While the solid curve is the best estimate, the grey shaded area represents the uncertainty in the study . Guess how many of the numerous subsequent studies lie outside the uncertainty range of the Hockey Stick? None. Guess how many show a Medieval period warmer than today? None. This is why the US National Academy of Science panel convened to investigate the controversy reported

""The basic conclusion of Mann et al. (1998, 1999) was that the late 20th century warmth in the Northern Hemisphere was unprecedented during at least the last 1000 years. This conclusion has subsequently been supported by an array of evidence that includes both additional large-scale surface temperature reconstructions and pronounced changes in a variety of local proxy indicators, such as melting on ice caps and the retreat of glaciers around the world"

One thing you will never discover from Mr McIntyre is the impact his findings have on basic conclusions. In fact, conducting the study using the methods he favours shifts the graph just an insignificant 0.05C. Using centred or non-centred Principal Component Analysis gives a Hockey Stick - using no PCAs at all gives ..... a Hockey Stick.

I would also be very wary about relying on Christopher Booker as a source: this is a man whose scientific expertise is such that he insists white asbestos is chemically identical to talcum powder, a position not appreciated by the HSE.

The hockey stick graph shows interesting things like it was supposedly warmer in the little ice age than in the immediately preceding period, which writers of the time recorded as being quite warm, and there are other sources of information such as blossom dates and crop yields which just do not fit what this graph is purporting to say... i.e. the graph just does not support the documented, cross checked, eye-witnesses accounts.

White asbestos is not the asbestos that is dangerous, in fact some floats about in the air naturally and we breath it in and out all the time. It's only in high concentrations it becomes dangerous, even flour at these concentrations is deadly (actually quite explosive too :-)