Bishop Hill Climate creationists
Mar 25, 2007 Climate OK, so you know the score. Carbon dioxide is on the loose and we're all going to hell in a handcart. In fact WE'RE ALL DOOMED! Scientists have been overwhelmed by a consensus (does that hurt?) and are yelling for politicians to do something about it. Meanwhile a small group of fruitcakes are trying to undermine efforts to save the planet.
A small group of fruitcakes.
These are called the sceptics, and they are HERETICS. They're going to hell in a handcart too, but nobody will talk to them when they get there, on account of them having been global warming deniers. They are BAD PEOPLE, but fortunately it's easy to spot them because they all have fistfulls of petrodollars stuffed in their pockets and they all work for oil companies, except the ones who don't and you can still spot them because of the petrodollars. So let's remember this people...
So the fruitcakes (may they rot in hell) are evil and they're like creationists. They spout their wicked lies, without a shred of scientific evidence to back them up, and disseminate them through the popular press - which everyone knows is owned by RUPERT MURDOCH. He is, of course, a puppet whose strings are pulled by BIG OIL. Yes, the popular press - like Proceedings of the Royal Society A - a grubby tabloid if ever there was one- or Geophysical Research Letters, all big-breasted ladies and even larger lies.
And now these creationist loons have got themselves a website. It's called Climate Audit and it's a magnet for every half-cut reactionary fruitloop fruitcake on the planet. Here they chant their neanderthal mantras and spew their evil bile. Just listen to this:
While I was reading about rotated varimax PCA in connection with Rob Wilson’s article, I came across R.W. Houghton and Y.M. Tourre, 1992, Characteristics of Low-Frequency Sea Surface Temperature Fluctuations in the Tropical Atlantic, Journal of Climate Volume 5, Issue 7 (July 1992) pp. 765–772 url. They observed that a PC analysis applied to Atlantic SSTs yielded a dipole in the 2nd EOF. Although this article is not discussed in Vimont and Kossin’s discussion of the Atlantic Multidecadal Mode, both articles seem to be probing similar data - with the Atlantic Multidecadal Mode looking very comparable to the dipole of Houghton and Toure.
How can anyone think that these people are scientists? Any right-thinking person can see at a glance that what is being talked about is THE OVERTHROW OF GLOBAL CIVILISATION! I mean, look at it! BURN THEM AND BURN THEM NOW!
But wait, a real scientist has actually entered the heretics' lair! Rob Wilson of the University of Edinburgh has gone to confront these loons on their own ground. Ha! Our very own Richard Dawkins taking apart the illiterate creationists with his razor sharp mind. Just enjoy this ripping apart of their stupid faith...
For DWJ2006, I compiled essentially a mean series of these data. The resultant time-series is essentially the same although with a slightly weaker r2 with GOA temperatures. In this study, I undertook nested PCA. Meaning, that PC regression was undertaken over multiple time-steps (i.e. as the shorter series left the data-set) to allow the quantification of the reduction in calibrated signal going back in time. This is not possible if all the data are averaged together, although, I will admit that one could do nested averaging at every time-step. I used PCA as it quantified nicely the regional differences in growth. I would mention a couple of papers where I have utilised a nested averaging approach, but you guys are busy enough trashing this paper and I do not want to give you more work.
You see what happens when these creationists are confronted with a real scientist? Someone who understands logic and the scientific method? And having reduced them to a quivering wreck with his laser-beam logic he delivers the coup de grace with this devastating parting shot...
Thank you for taking the trouble to read the paper. Please feel free to submit any ‘issues’ that you may have to Climate Dynamics, and I will gladly address them through the peer review process.
And so end all creationists...
Reader Comments (2)
"Recall Esper et al 2003:
... this does not mean that one could not improve a chronology by reducing the number of series used if the purpose of removing samples is to enhance a desired signal. The ability to pick and choose which samples to use is an advantage unique to dendroclimatology.
Mining promoters would love to have this “advantage” as well."
I need to put together a post on it.