The AGW propononents use a single temperature proxy, tree-rings, to predict global catastrophe.
This article uses the average of 18 temperature proxies for the past two-thousand years.
This is definitive data, folks.
Any time an enviro-wacko calls you a global-warming denier, wave this article in their face and ask them to refute it.
If there isn't any global warming, there isn't any anthropogenic component either.
bump for ammo.
Coincidence? I think not.
POGW Ping.
Thanks. Well Done.
I downloaded the article immediately.
Gadzooks. The author used creditable data, processed it in a meaningful way, did not throw away “inconvenient” data, and presented the results in a clear and understandable way. He’ll never be reported in the NYT.
self bump
Was that John McCain I heard today pledging to be green and to do something about greenhouse gases?
So you know and I know, but how do we get past the steel bars of the MSM cage and get the message public? What to use as a hacksaw so to speak?
I’ll pass this on to many, but that is a few only, and many of those folks will look at this, their eyes will glaze over, and the delete button will serve its purpose.
But what about the shrinking Polar bear testicles?
This is the key statement near the end which allows both that previous data still need to be compared to the authors’ methods and that this study, like all scientific studies that are not biased by agenda, are merely signposts on a roadmap that will lead to the true destination.
“While instrumental data are not strictly comparable, the rise in
29 year-smoothed global data from NASA GISS (http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp)
from 1935 to 1992 (with data from 1978 to 2006) is 0.34 Deg C. Even adding this rise
to the 1935 reconstructed value, the MWP peak remains 0.07 Deg C above the end of
the 20th Century values, though the difference is not significant.
The main significance of the results here is not the details of every wiggle, which
are probably not reliable, but the overall picture of the 2000 year pattern showing the
MWP and LIA timing and curve shapes. Future studies need to acquire more and
better data to refine this picture.”
cogitator needs to add this to his archive.
TO READ LATER, THX
bttt
The National Science Foundation investigaterd the Algore version of history (which emasculates the little ice age), and said it is not inconsistent with the data. This is not an affirmation. This is a statement that the UN was in the no man’s land between science and fraud. The NAtional Science Foundation then adopted something like this version of history (with the little ice), and the clear implication that we are currently in a not unusual warming phase in the hsitory of the world. As to whether human activity is ADDING TO this warming phase remains a legitimate question.
Looks like an oscillation with around a 1300 year cycle. What with data we’re seeing about variations in solar output, I’m thinking there may be more coming from solar output oscillation than any human cause
Ping