Comment on The legacy of climategate by Girma
Willis I greatly appreciate her previous statement, the one you quoted. That is great. That is here considered statement. I think you expect people to be much more consistent and always precise. You...
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate by Wagathon
As in Welcome to the… If you don’t believe global warming alarmism is destroying Western civilization then answer six questions (see, Paul Driessen, et al., Cause for alarm, 23-May-10). They are as...
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by Girma
your voice can only lose credibility when you present politics as though it were science. You cannot help attacking people. Please stop being a bully! It is here blog and she can put whatever she likes.
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by Bart R
Girma | May 10, 2012 at 10:04 am | Mr. Orssengo, you have conviction in your beliefs; there is no evidence you ever were actually convinced before you took up these beliefs. To have 100% conviction is...
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by Wagathon
Of course if we want we already know enough to model the climate with relatively astounding accuracy — considering it really does not change much — and not just 100s of years out but even billions of...
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by timg56
I’m sure they only mean Fox News. Everybody’s favorite whipping boy.
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by timg56
Which may explain why you come off as someone already half into their cups.
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by Wayne2
I thought the paper sounded like something else, and last night it hit me. Maibach, et al, sounds like a job candidates answer to the question, “What is your greatest weakness?” You know, the one where...
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by R. Gates
What part of the “globe” and over what cherry-picked time frame?
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by hunter
Michael, If it were a few testy e-mails, yo u might have a point. But good luck with getting those floors to pass inspection.
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by Theodore
The fact that the author uncritically starts from the position that the inquiries cleared the CRU people of scientific misconduct undermines their position. It has been clearly established that the...
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by Girma
Do you realize that IPCC goat a warming rate of about 0.2 deg C per decade for the period 1970-2000 because it did not remove the warming rate due to ocean cycles shown here? => http://bit.ly/HRvReF...
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by timg56
This: We can vote out pollies but even this is pointless as we have to replace them with other pollies. Depressing, but true. I’m still exercising my right to vote, but am also exercising my right to...
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by Dan Wallace
I think that what most of the commenters on Dr. Curry’s site fail to remember is that AGW is only a failure of communications. By posting different stories and different interpretations only then can...
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by R. Gates
Tony, I’d be very interested to see what you consider as more accurate graphs of the MWP (called MCA by some) and the LIA than shown here: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/326/5957/1256/F1.large.jpg...
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by timg56
No, But banning cookies is typically something one can expect the state of Mass. to do. Frontrunners in showing what it takes to be a good nanny. Michael, are you familiar with the concept of personal...
View ArticleComment on The legacy of climategate: Part II by timg56
This explains a lot. As I recall, there has been quite a lot reported on how medical research isn’t exactly scientific and about the non-repeatability of a lot of studies.
View ArticleComment on Climate sensitivity discussion thread by Bart R
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/best/mean:43/mean:67/isolate:123/plot/sidc-ssn/mean:7/mean:11/scale:-0.001/from:1810/to:2002 Solar correlation with GMT isolates works brilliantly as far back as the...
View Article