Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« George Monbiot: scrubbing the record clean | Main | Financial Post op-ed »
Saturday
Sep182010

Josh 42

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (12)

Bish - Judith Curry has just started a thread on the 'recent challenges to the credibility of climate science' on her blog. Your report is specifically listed (alongside McKitrick's) as a discussion point. You might wish to keep a beady eye on proceedings.

Bit of a bore on a Saturday night, but such is life.

Apologies if this is rather old news to you.

Dominic

Sep 18, 2010 at 6:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterBBD

A living library.
=========

Sep 18, 2010 at 8:13 PM | Unregistered Commenterkim

Ha! I laughed before I even scrolled down to read the text :o)

Sep 18, 2010 at 9:05 PM | Unregistered CommenterPete

Nice warm feeling in my dreams in there. Shame to wake up and smell the coffee.

Sep 18, 2010 at 9:55 PM | Unregistered CommenterPharos

Josh, is there a sub-species Manniacus?

Sep 18, 2010 at 11:09 PM | Unregistered CommenterRayG

H
Ray, hmm, could be a breed only found in Philly.

Sep 18, 2010 at 11:50 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosh

Josh, make that College Park, Pennsylvania which is the home of Penn State. U of Penn (higher academic standards, not much of an American football team [if they even have one]) is in Philadelphia. Many more trees than in Phila. They ring the campus.

Sep 19, 2010 at 12:55 AM | Unregistered CommenterRayG

There are usually few comments on the cartoons by Josh. I guess it's because there is not much to add really, they are just to the point and sum it all up.

Should there ever be such thing as a "greatest hits" list, I think I'll vote for the "WC"-cartoon...

There's only one Josh - thank you Josh.

Sep 19, 2010 at 10:26 PM | Unregistered CommenterFeedback

Nice Josh. :D

Sep 20, 2010 at 7:26 AM | Unregistered Commenterjeff id

Yer Grace, please help me out.

I am told that "There was a subsequent review by the National Academy of Science and new data that affirmed the hockey-stick graph"

How can I answer this?

What is the crucial thing that is false about the hockey-stick graph?

What is the evidence for this?

Sep 20, 2010 at 9:10 PM | Unregistered CommenterRichard

I know a good book where this is all explained....

The NAS panel confirmed the main criticisms of the hockey stick but said that other studies came to the same conclusions. These other studies were based on the same flawed data.

Sep 20, 2010 at 9:12 PM | Registered CommenterBishop Hill

Thank yer kindly yer grace

Sep 20, 2010 at 9:39 PM | Unregistered CommenterRichard

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>