Moonwalker
New member
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,199
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Last edited:
The body of evidence still strongly suggests human beings are directly influencing their climate.
The tree-ring trick is pretty well known and statistically valid, so I see nothing of merit in the article.
So tree rings are perfectly good measurements of temperature prior to 1960 and then magically stop being good measurements of temperature afterwards? Am I the only one who sees a problem here?
So tree rings are perfectly good measurements of temperature prior to 1960 and then magically stop being good measurements of temperature afterwards? Am I the only one who sees a problem here?
No, the "trick" is a bit different: It just adds the instrument temperature data plot to the tree ring reconstruction plot.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack/#more-1853
So, you are sure not the only one who sees a problem there, the whole right-wing mafia is busy masturbating over the news, but people who know what "mikes trick" will tell you that it is no problem and far less magical or conspiracy as it is presented.
Of course, who would have expected different. But I prefer trusting people on that who had documented Mike's trick already 5 years ago in Wikipedia.
While not everything that is called science is real science indeed.