Reply to: What if man made climate change

[sasguru]

whoops fixed the link.

Turn to section 2, where crüger et al. outline how they compare ice core data up until 1987 with atmospheric data.

Yes that's the final nail in the coffin for AGW!
Good job - who knew we had such talent on CUK.



Moron

[BlasterBates]

whoops fixed the link.

Turn to section 2, where crüger et al. outline how they compare ice core data up until 1987 with atmospheric data.

[sasguru]

Here it is in black and white proof data goes to 1987:

crueger_2004JD005014.jgr.pdf&sa=U&ei=GxZITczNMIuDh Qfe_7S_BQ&ved=0CBYQFjAC&usg=AFQjCNHuAIapx2eYa9HILO CzbV0gTuq5eg



QED

Well done. When are you collecting your Nobel?

[BlasterBates]

Here it is in black and white proof data goes to 1987:

http://www.google.ch/url?q=http://co...3l8FvCify_ybag
QED

[BlasterBates]

Show me the upward spike on this other Greenland temp record:

http://www.google.ch/url?q=http://ww...cY58BeertBjsuw

Phil Jones cites this one as a key temperature record.

This simply coroborates Easterbrook's construction of the Greenland temp records, which are supposedly falsified.

[Spacecadet]

What baffles me is how pjclarke is usually completely invisible on CUK, and yet manages to start replying within minutes of a climate debate starting, and has never discussed anything else here AFAIR.

It's good to have someone who seems to know what they are talking about, especially as I'm skeptical of the skepticism widespread on CUK (but equally suspicious of leftie alarmism), but quite bizarre the way (s)he is able to home in so fast, like a randy moth detecting a whiff of pheromone for miles.

your answer may lie here:
Twitter Bot Auto-Debates Climate Change Critics

[sasguru]

The top of the ice core is 1987 not 1950, from then on extrapolation from temp records, either satellite or local Greenland temp. The ice core is dated from dust particles.

Ah thats the missing piece of the puzzle!
AGW is crap, you convinced me with that brilliant piece of reasoning.


Jeez you couldn't make it up but apparently you can.

[OwlHoot]

What baffles me is how pjclarke is usually completely invisible on CUK, and yet manages to start replying within minutes of a climate debate starting, and has never discussed anything else here AFAIR.

It's good to have someone who seems to know what they are talking about, especially as I'm skeptical of the skepticism widespread on CUK (but equally suspicious of leftie alarmism), but quite bizarre the way (s)he is able to home in so fast, like a randy moth detecting a whiff of pheromone for miles.

[BlasterBates]

it covers to 0 BP. In paleo terms that's 1950

The top of the ice core is 1987 not 1950, from then on extrapolation from temp records, either satellite or local Greenland temp. The ice core is dated from dust particles.

[sasguru]

I'm more inclined to tear people limb from limb.

Yes dear ....if you say so

[sasguru]

You have a very funny view on how to conduct a scientific debate.

Well maybe that's true.
But you're not conducting one at all.

[sasguru]

I very rarely say this, but in your case I shall make an exception: why don't you just FOAD?

Yes thats a rational response.

[BlasterBates]

it covers to 0 BP. In paleo terms that's 1950

I'm glad you admit the blogger talked Bull Sh*t, when he said 1855.

Easterbrook I believe used the global temperature records to extend from 1950 onwards.

No falsified data.

His point was how temperatures change over thousands of years.

I find it interesting how you get bored when we discredit your blogger. What you want is that you post a false accusation from an arrogant prig and we all accept it.

You have a very funny view on how to conduct a scientific debate.

[BlasterBates]

(a) That's a different ice core, (b) it covers to 0 BP. In paleo terms that's 1950.

. - wiki.

And the resolution of the cores means that the topmost samples are a few decades old ....



OK, how about straight from the scientist who published the GISP2 data series that Easterbrook relies on? The whole response is too long to post, but he concludes:



That's Richard Alley, producer of the data series that Easterbrook misrepresents and author of the standard text on the Greenland ice cores..

If we're arguing from authority, might as well select the best .....

Bye for now.

Easterbrook extended the data, with the up to date data, obviously most of it was from the older data set several thousand years.

His graph covered thousands of years he added the bit at the end from the up to date ice core and the satellite data I believe.

[BlasterBates]

If you were dying of cancer would you take the generally accepted consensus treatment or pick one of the many quacks peddling alternative cures?

I would take a new revolutionary treatment that was on trial, if the research was promising.

Easterbrook and William Gray are not "quacks" they have tremendous reputations.

As are other scientists who share their opinion.