Re: excellent article on global warming
- From: don@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Don Klipstein)
- Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 22:34:45 +0000 (UTC)
In article <3qtf05l9s5dddpepkjci84m24iv69ot43t@xxxxxxx>, flipper wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2009 02:57:51 +0000 (UTC), don@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Don
Klipstein) wrote:
In article <quac05tgmikapg8c8bvh9m658bk479tbom@xxxxxxx>, flipper wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2009 22:44:18 +0000 (UTC), don@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Don
Klipstein) wrote:
In article <c0jvv49hplqsci0o3dm8hci8qq15s9tarq@xxxxxxx>, flipper wrote:
On Mon, 4 May 2009 14:32:56 -0700 (PDT), z <gzuckier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On May 4, 1:29 pm, Raveninghorde <raveninghorde@invalid> wrote:
The antartic ice is above long term trend:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/iphone/images/iphone.anomaly....- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
and the arctic ice is below long term trend
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/sea.ice.anomaly.timeseries.jpg
No, you mean it's below the cherry picked cyclical peak.
This is one reason why I wouldn't trust a 'climate change' advocate to
tell me if it were raining outside. They always cherry pick some
cyclical peak to compare against. If it's temperature they pick the
end of the little ice age and then, oh my, oh my, it's gotten warmer.
The past decade was warmer than even Loehle's reconstruction of the
medieval warm period.
That's not true and you're playing the same game of cherry picking
your data. In this case you're altering Loehle's reconstruction with
alternate proxies because you don't like the results his proxies
produced.
PLease try on your own to splice smoothed global HadCRUT-3 onto Loehle's
"Corrected Global Temperature Reconstruction" at any year both existed.
When I want to know what 'his' graph is I look at 'his' graph.
Quick, without looking, which are the 'gold standard'? Mann PC1
bristlecones or Ababneh bristlecones or Indigirka tree rings?
http://www.jennifermarohasy.com/blog/archives/002711.html
I think it's good enough to splice smoothed global HadCRUT-3 onto
Loehle's "Corrected Global Temperature Reconstruction" at 1890, 1900,
1920, or the (IIRC) 1925 termination pouint of Loehle's "Corrected Global
Temperature Reconstruction".
His corrected graph covers the same time frame as the original and you
'adjusting' it is not 'his' graph.
I am not adjusting anyone's graph - I propose splicing together two that
cover different time periods with a bit of overlap.
Loehle's original, that Eeyore has posted as a binary in this
newsgroup, goes to 1980 - at least according to the data file that a link
that comes with that graph (and not shown by Eeyore) links to. Without
the data file, appearance of the graph allows some to claim it goes to
more modern times still, since the publication mentions 1995.
http://www.ncasi.org/publications/Detail.aspx?id=3025
The PDF has two articles by Loehle. The second is the correction.
Meanwhile, I correct myself - the article says the covered period goes
to 1935, not 1925.
<SNIP>
- Don Klipstein (don@xxxxxxxxx)
.
- References:
- Re: excellent article on global warming
- From: Bob Eld
- Re: excellent article on global warming
- From: Eeyore
- Re: excellent article on global warming
- From: Bob Eld
- Re: excellent article on global warming
- From: Raveninghorde
- Re: excellent article on global warming
- From: z
- Re: excellent article on global warming
- From: Don Klipstein
- Re: excellent article on global warming
- From: Don Klipstein
- Re: excellent article on global warming
- Prev by Date: Re: Core selection
- Next by Date: Re: Core selection
- Previous by thread: Re: excellent article on global warming
- Next by thread: Re: excellent article on global warming
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|