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

Discussion > GHG Theory step by step

GC - I'vechallenged you before to provide examples of Dr Mann's scientific malfeasance. Still waiting.

Making unfounded accusations is not a good look.

Let's do a thought experiment: imagine a world in which the HS studies had never been published. The case for AGW would be identical.

Jan 31, 2018 at 9:42 AM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

The case for AGW would be identical.
Erm…. No. For a start, the Mediæval Warm Period and Little Ice Age would still be acknowledged, as would the fact that the longer-term trend of cooling is still ongoing. Also, there would probably not be the alarm that is being whipped up over nothing at all about what slight warming we have had since the Little Ice Age, and hopefully continue to have (for a few more decades, at least – alas, it might now be teetering on the edge of a precipitous drop, for which the only joy that could be gained is the silencing of you and your ilk); nor would there be untold billions being thrown at this non-problem in some fatuous, vacuous attempts to “solve” it, and the money could be used more constructively in raising so many people out of the abject poverty that this fear-mongering is trapping them in.

Jan 31, 2018 at 11:03 AM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

Erm…. No. For a start, the Mediæval Warm Period and Little Ice Age would still be acknowledged, as would the fact that the longer-term trend of cooling is still ongoing.

Except the hockey stick does have an LIA, a generally cool period with a minimum around 1450AD. As MBH99 only went back to AD1000, it missed the first part of the MWP, which was in any event seems to have happened at differing times in different parts of the globe, and not been as warm as today.

In any event, the proposal that the globe has been warm due to natural causes therefore current warmth cannot be manmade is an obvious logical fallacy. The case for AGW remains intact.

Ongoing cooling? Where?

Jan 31, 2018 at 11:48 AM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

Phil Clarke, Radical Rodent beat me to it.

How did Mann lose the MWP and the LIA?

For somebody quick to accuse people of being liars, why are you demonstrating more sensitivity, than the Climate does to CO2?

All Mann has to do, is provide evidence. Preferably in Court, involving Legal Action that HE has instigated, but now delays. Until then, he is merely blustery, as are you, and the rest of Climate Science.

Is your faith in AGW why you were so impressed with Gergis 2016, that Climate Science has not withdrawn or retracted despite the Lies?

Jan 31, 2018 at 12:30 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Sorry, I wanted actual examples.

Jan 31, 2018 at 12:41 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

So you accept that there was a Little Ice Age (LIA)… Thus, you should accept that there was a warmer period before, for the LIA to be referred to as the LIA, which implies that the flat line of the infamous hockey stick should not have been flat, but, at the very least, inclined. As the Vikings engaged in activities in Greenland around AD 1000 that are not possible today does give strong evidence that it was warmer during the MWP than it is, now… but, let’s dismiss that, eh? (And why not? You happily dismiss any other evidence that contradicts your preciously-held beliefs; at least sceptics are prepared to consider anything and everything – and continue to wait for any realistic evidence (“’cos the models say it is so!” does not count as evidence) that this is all man-made!)

In any event, the proposal that the globe has been warm due to natural causes therefore current warmth cannot be manmade is an obvious logical fallacy.
Apart from the fact that few are saying that the present warming cannot be man-made; most just say that it is unlikely, as the present warming is well within natural variation.

Interesting that the graph you produce is referencing “temperature anomaly.” Anomalous to what?

Jan 31, 2018 at 12:59 PM | Registered CommenterRadical Rodent

which implies that the flat line of the infamous hockey stick should not have been flat, but, at the very least, inclined

It is.

Jan 31, 2018 at 1:27 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

Medieval Warmth in Greenland is acknowledged, but Greenland is not the world.

The reconstructed MCA pattern is characterized by warmth over a large part of the North Atlantic, Southern Greenland, the Eurasian Arctic, and parts of North America, which appears to substantially exceed that of the modern late– 20th century (1961–1990) baseline and is comparable to or exceeds that of the past one-to-two decades in some regions. […] Certain regions, such as central Eurasia, northwestern North America, and (with less confidence) parts of the South Atlantic, exhibit anomalous coolness. The LIA pattern is characterized primarily by pronounced cooling over the Northern Hemisphere continents, but with some regions—e.g., parts of the Middle East, central North Atlantic, Africa, and isolated parts of the United States, tropical Eurasia, and the extratropical Pacific Ocean—displaying warmth comparable to that of the present day.

Global Signatures and Dynamical Origins of the Little Ice Age and Medieval Climate Anomaly

Science 326

Jan 31, 2018 at 1:39 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke

Sorry, I wanted actual examples.

Jan 31, 2018 at 12:41 PM | Phil Clarke

The whole world is waiting for some evidence of AGW. You quote sources devoted to Mann.

Mann "projected" an uptick. We got a pause.

Which bits of Climate Science are worth keeping, because otherwise it will all be thrown away. I have politely asked you before, but you are unable to work it out yourself.

Jan 31, 2018 at 2:10 PM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

Mann "projected" an uptick. We got a pause.

Ah, finally, a fact. When and where did he make this projection?

Jan 31, 2018 at 2:39 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhil Clarke