Comment on Hiding the Decline: Part II by dp
I’m not equating the two – I’m acknowledging that you and I live in local weather, not global climate. We don’t live in average conditions, we live in continuously varying conditions. We are not...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part II by CMS
In the vein of what leads a non climate scientist to question the bible of climate science. I am definitely not a Republican and fact probably to the left of most Democrats. I fear the demagogues of...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part II by cagw_skeptic99
Very perceptive studies Martha. Do you have one that shows why the attempt by the President of the US to pass laws promoting your position failed, even with super majorities in both houses? And another...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part II by Coldish
Paul, are you thinking of the Doran and Kendall Zimmerman (2009) questionnaire survey (Climate Change, 90, pp. 21-22)? That survey did have the figure 97% among its results. The final sample size was...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline by Lazar
“if the hockey stick wasn’t in the data to begin with” If there were no series with hockey-stick shapes in the data to begin with, then there would be no hockey-stick shaped PC regardless of which...
View ArticleComment on Physics of the atmospheric greenhouse(?) effect by feet2thefire
If I understand this fully, I am gratified that the greenhouse effect is being laid aside, finally. But lest we forget: It is not just A greenhouse effect we are talking about, but a “Runaway...
View ArticleComment on Physics of the atmospheric greenhouse(?) effect by feet2thefire
“It was, in fact, nothing more than a speculation, but it was seized upon by science – because they had no other aces up their sleeves.” should have been: “Sagan’s speculation was, in fact, nothing...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline by ferd berple
I’ve scanned the emails briefly. The point that stuck in my mind is that the warming from 1910-1940 is of equal magnitude to the warming of 1970-2000. http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part II by Ted Carmichael
Latitude, my understanding is that most of the tree ring data was calibrated on temperature data from 1881 to 1940 (Briffa, 1998) or 1881 to 1960 (Briffa, 2001). I’m not sure about the validation...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part III by ianash
A little more cognitive dissonance for the climategate conspiracy theorists: Inspector General’s Review of Stolen Emails Confirms No Evidence of Wrong-Doing by NOAA Climate Scientists Report is the...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part III by ianash
JC…OK, now I get it…JC…..it all fits together now. She is the Denialist’s Saviour! When does the beatification occur?
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part III by Hector M.
AR5 is already in the making. A good start for restoring credibility would be that their report (and also the SPM) includes something like the following: 1. In TAR it was suggested that recent warming...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part III by ianash
Eh? Like the one you play with in your bath?
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part III by Hector M.
Correction to my latest: “…than thought at the time of TAR and AR4.” Other suggestions welcome.
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part III by Hector M.
Ianash, for the Inspector General report, it is best to read the IG report, rather than the summary prepared by NOAA for press release. At Climate Audit, in a post this Wednesday or Thursday, several...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline by Dana
That’s not accurate. Anthropogenic GHG emissions certainly weren’t nearly as large in the early 20th century as they are now, but they weren’t zero, either. The early 20th century warming was partly...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part III by Hector M.
To wit: http://climateaudit.org/2011/02/24/noaa-misrepresents-inspector-general-report/. http://climateaudit.org/2011/02/24/solomons-divergence-problem/.
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline by Jim D
Photosynthesis requires both CO2 and H2O to work. The H2O comes from the rainfall via the soil and roots. I would expect increased CO2 use, and plant growth, since it is considered a fertilizer, would...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part II by John Carpenter
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Jeff, you seem to imply that weather events are evidence of AGW. How often in past years have we heard that weather is not climate by...
View ArticleComment on Hiding the Decline: Part III by John Eggert
Dr. Curry, et al: A number of years ago, at Slashdot, I wrote that as scientists we had better be right about global warming because if we are wrong, science will be the ultimate casualty. I still...
View Article