EnviroLink Forum

I see that not only do you like name calling those who agree with 97+% of scientists on AGW, you can't even read (or spell)properly.
"Jan Esper of Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany, thinks that at least some of those tree rings actually show something else: a long-term cooling trend that lasted right up until the Industrial Revolution."
What happened with the Industrial Revolution? The widespread burning of fossil fuels.
Face it, snow, you are just an argumentative creep. In an argument that really should have ended long ago with rapid change to low emissions, lowered population to long term sustainable, and transition to a steady state environmental economy. I notice three of you denialist creeps have come from TES. Well, this isn't that PC garbage place that gave equal credence to denialism with garbage re-cycled debunked pseudo-science. Tree ring studies are a good reference when backed up with other evidence, which they were.

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”
― Chief Seattle

Calm down and get a grip.

If the tree ring evidence is reliable(as an indicator of climate temperature) then the present warmish period is not exceptional.

If we are having an exceptional effect on the world's climate then either the tree ring data would show this or it is too unreliable to be used.

Without tree ring data there is a distinct lack of any "hockey stick" exceptional temperature change. With it there is no exceptional temperature change.

The obvious conclusion is that there is no exceptional temperature change going on.

I note your use of a key word 'Exceptional".

How exceptional does mankind have to be to cause serious, life-changing effects on the environment?

Indeed; your use of 'No exceptional' suggests even you believe at least effects are taking place: only not exceptional.

There's hope for you yet, Tim!

The current warmish period seems to be not exceptional and, according to the consensus, not a lot to worry about.

It may be the result of our industrial activity.

It may cause the world to get a bit warmer still.

That seems to be a generslly positive thing. More food, more rain, more life in general. Bad if you own a ski lodge.

We should not do vast damage to our selves by abandoning the wonderful fruits of our industry. There is nothing to worry about from CO2. There is a lot to worry about from the Maoist green/Comunist types who want to have some sort of cultural revolution.

Boy, you are a head in the sand "I will not take my head out" type of denialist that does NOT belong at Envirolink. Shove it in your face and you still can't smell it, your own excrement. Flog yourself, kool aid drinker. What a maroon, as Bugs Bunny would say.
http://climatecommunication.org/new/art ... /overview/
Oh, I am so sorry flogger, yes CAGW to AETM is great for future humans and other living things>>>>>>>NOT!!!!
Read everything at the site above, then come back educated, goodbye.

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”
― Chief Seattle

Johnny: come on now! That's a bit harsh! Let's play nice(If we can )

Tim, at least, doesn't seem to be a 'it ain't heating at all' denigelical. I take him for a 'hot is good' denigelical.

The whole tired bit about the commies coming to get us is getting pretty silly, though....

Actually it would still be exceptional.



It does show it.



Odd that is exactly the opposite of what was claimed about the original "hockey stick". The denial seems to have come full circle.



Not so much obvious since even the reconstruction the skeptical researchers undertook came up with the same conclusion of there being an exceptional warming trend.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

oh no! they all look like hockey sticks!

Gosh they do, you don't need a science degree to tell what the implications of those graphs are, perhaps that's why so much effort has gone into quashing them and silencing the scientists that are responsible for them.

Tack this onto any reconstruction and you will get a hockey stick, which is why there is a problem with bashing the hockey stick graph.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

In 10 to 20 years welcome to this present weather for the rest of our lives. It seems cooling has been predicted by skeptics (deniers and liars to) for some time now. When is this suppose to happen?

Can't deny it anymore, embrace it. Farming in hell is where I want to be now.

The warming is producing a ratio of about 7 or 10 to 1 warming record to cooling record. I've seen the numbers being thrown around a lot lately. That is a sure sign of a warming world when this happpens year after year.

Interesting. The warming isn't exceptional but its a good thing. Is this a contradiction. Or are you really saying exceptionally warm is good.

To hell with the polar bears, lets get that oil in the artic.

I'll go with the longest graph.

It does not extend into the Roman period thus does not refer to the point of this thread.

The point is that if the climate was warmer than now in the Roman period, ( a safe bet given the Roman growing of vines in York ), then that warming happened without the effect of increased CO2. And the present warming cannot be seen as exectional when compaired to the longer historic view.

If the tree ring data which shows this Roman warm period is good(the data) then the present warm period cannot be automatically atributed to industrial activity.

If the tree ring data is unreliable then the origional hockey stick data must be discounted as equally unreliable.

There are other temperature data sets which do to variuos degrees show the "hockey stick" sudden warming of the period 1970-2000.

Those which show this most clearly are the most massarged/corrected. I am not suficiently statistically proficient to argue the degree to which the correction is or is not justified. I read those debates and see that there is a high degree of reasonable sounding sceptisisim from people who do know what they are talking about. I also see that there is a highly emotionally driven need for other scientists to proove the case that the present warming is excetional. Whilst such drive is the basis of exploration it should not be ignored when reading the results of such scientific discovery. I think that the present warm period may well be the result of human activity but I see nothing which causes me to lose sleep over it, indeed it seems generally a good thing.

The polar bears did manage to survive the Roman period after all.

They were growing vines in York? must have been much warmer now as that's clearly impossible now. Silly scientists should have checked with an expert on roman history first

I wonder where people are growing wine now?

http://www.ukvines.co.uk/wine/north.htm



for the benefit of people not up to speed on UK geography Ryedale is very near York if it's not a district of it.

Oh dear, another leaky argument from Tim the plumber.

Which "longest" graph would that be? Several extend farther in the past but for the comparison are set to the same scale.



Not on this graph but the data for some of them do extend farther back.



Faulty logic exhibiting a lack of understanding of localized and larger climate data. The current heat wave in the northern hemisphere is brutal, but the global average temperature is not that much different. If one were to take the data from the US and made a generalization about the global climate they would be wrong.



A big if, but the warming is not automatically treated as anything without supporting data ... except by those such as are sometimes called deniers.



Again faulty logic. The original tree ring data temperature reconstruction has been supported in reconstructions using other types of data. It is this independent verifcation that gives credibility to the reconstruction. This ONE study treating the tree ring data differently is not supported by any other research and unless and until it is will not have sufficient credibility for any real comparison. If it is found to be in correct it will only reflect on the treatment mechanism used to generate the reconstruction and not all of that type of data. This study clearly states it has a different reconstruction than the other studies, which makes it the outlier at this point in time.



You mean ALL of the instrumental methods of temperature measurement?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein