Am I still allowed to question climate change?

[Grandad.Malky]

I know someone that can make a rather nifty A-board if you are interested

[Wildcat]

I know someone that can make a rather nifty A-board if you are interested

 

No thanks, but I like the rose tinted spectacles you are wearing, where did you get them?

[Grandad.Malky]

No thanks, but I like the rose tinted spectacles you are wearing, where did you get them?

 

I don’t need spec’s, why my vision isn’t blurred.

[Wildcat]

I don’t need spec’s, why my vision isn’t blurred.

 

Maybe you need to adjust your afdb, then?

 

As apposed to National mind controlling governments that fund the pro-scientists.

[I1L2T3]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11644-climate-myths-it-was-warmer-during-the-medieval-period-with-vineyards-in-england.html

 

OMG do you genuinely rely on this claptrap as some kind of evidence.

 

I've never seen a more lightweight rebuttal of the MWP or the little Ice age. Ever!

 

Hang your head in shame.

[Wildcat]

OMG do you genuinely rely on this claptrap as some kind of evidence.

 

I've never seen a more lightweight rebuttal of the MWP or the little Ice age. Ever!

 

Hang your head in shame.

 

It wasn't intended as a rebuttal, it was intended as a description of the temperatures around that time, that would give an answer to the specific question asked as to whether the MWP was warmer than today.

[Cyclone]

It lists some of the Ice Cores here that give different periods for the MWP and LIA in different regions of the globe:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period

 

What does it matter? It matters if people are seeking to explain it.

 

You accept that these things happened, that the current models don't represent them and can't explain them, but you're convinced that the only possible explanation for fluctuating temperatures today is AGW. Not the same mechanism that seems to have been causing the temperature to change in the past.

Are you familiar with occams razor, causal fallacy and the centre of the universe fallacy?

[Wildcat]

You accept that these things happened, that the current models don't represent them and can't explain them, but you're convinced that the only possible explanation for fluctuating temperatures today is AGW. Not the same mechanism that seems to have been causing the temperature to change in the past.

Are you familiar with occams razor, causal fallacy and the centre of the universe fallacy?

 

Yes familiar with all those fallacies.

 

Are you familiar with the scienitific method whereby the best theory is the one that gives the best results? ie the ones involving human influenced climate change that map the extraordinary rise in temperatures today?

 

I judge theories on results not wishful thinking.

 

See the paper quoted by Jibbo as one of the examples of the papers that require the inclusion of greenhouse gases and aerosols to explain recorded temperatures.

 

In relation to the MWP there are a number of explanations in the literature, so the premise of you argument is flawed. The fact there isn't a simple answer to it, shows how complex the science is and how complex the MWP is it does afterall occur hundreds of years apart in different regions of the globe.

 

See for example the explanations given in the 2001 IPCC report:

http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/070.htm

Edited December 9, 2009 by Wildcat

[JIbbo]

Yes familiar with all those fallacies.

 

Are you familiar with the scienitific method whereby the best theory is the one that gives the best results? ie the ones involving human influenced climate change that map the extraordinary rise in temperatures today?

 

I judge theories on results not wishful thinking.

 

See the paper quoted by Jibbo as one of the examples of the papers that require the inclusion of greenhouse gases and aerosols to explain recorded temperatures.

 

In relation to the MWP there are a number of explanations in the literature, so the premise of you argument is flawed. The fact there isn't a simple answer to it, shows how complex the science is and how complex the MWP is it does afterall occur hundreds of years apart in different regions of the globe.

 

See for example the explanations given in the 2001 IPCC report:

http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/?src=/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/070.htm

 

I've NEVER quoted the above paper

 

Mann et al. (1998) and Jones et al. (1998) quoted extensively in the article you have referenced.

 

Enough said.

[Greybeard]

Mann et al. (1998) and Jones et al. (1998) quoted extensively in the article you have referenced.

 

Enough said.

 

The CRU has to eliminate the MWP if it is to be convincing that recent temperature rises are unprecedented and correlate solely to rising levels of CO2.

 

A more recent paper by Moberg, A., et al. 2005, Stockholm University, -

 

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/contributions_by_author/moberg2005/nhtemp-moberg2005.txt

 

results in this graph.

 

http://www.co2science.org/data/mwp/images/l1_mobergnh2.gif