lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2016 at 6:16pm:


It's called an abstract. On the same abstract:

using an example case of Scots pine from Torneträsk, Sweden

It's very relevant if you are a Moose or an interesting  furry animal from Sweden.

Hm, how good is the Yamal data, if you are going for how limited scope the new paper is.

John_Taverner wrote on Jan 31^st, 2016 at 6:41pm:


We have perfectly good instrumental data. That's why the liks of NOAA and our own BoM have decided on 'homogenisation' so as to eliminate the inconvenient truths of this 'perfectly good instrumental data'. The argo Buoys recorded sea temperature for many may years, but NOAA rejected that data and instead used (no joke), temperatures from buckets taken by passing ships.

So why do all these things? TO GET THE ANSWER YOU WANT, not the actual answers.

John_Taverner wrote on Jan 31^st, 2016 at 6:41pm:



Dear Breathless, How about Marcott?

'One author, Jeremy Shakun (currently at Harvard) weighed in via Skype for Dot Earth. When more questions came in, the group of authors wrote that they would respond more completely to questions about the work and now they have done so, on the RealClimate blog. Here’s a short excerpt and link to the rest:

    Q.

    What do paleotemperature reconstructions show about the temperature of the last 100 years?
    A.

    Our global paleotemperature reconstruction includes a so-called “uptick” in temperatures during the 20th-century. However, in the paper we make the point that this particular feature is of shorter duration than the inherent smoothing in our statistical averaging procedure, and that it is based on only a few available paleo-reconstructions of the type we used. Thus, the 20th century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions. Our primary conclusions are based on a comparison of the longer term paleotemperature changes from our reconstruction with the well-documented temperature changes that have occurred over the last century, as documented by the instrumental record. Although not part of our study, high-resolution paleoclimate data from the past ~130 years have been compiled from various geological archives, and confirm the general features of warming trend over this time interval.'

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/fresh-thoughts-from-authors-of-a-pa...

And of course Mann did precisely that, marrying Dendro to "perfectly good instrumental data" to show it was only 20th century warming.

lee wrote on Jan 31^st, 2016 at 8:05pm:


I'll ask again. Do you think that  paleoclimate reconstructions have any bearing on instrumental datasets ?

Are they used in NASA GISTEMP?
Are they  used in NOAA MLOST?
Are they  used in Hadley Hadcrut datasets?

Quote:


I think you are confused by reading too many blogs. Answer my first question.

lee wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 10:26am:


I asked first. For some reason you are avoiding the question.

lee wrote on Feb 1^st, 2016 at 3:16pm:


I find it incomprehensible that anyone with any intellectual honesty would adjust accurate temperature readings in line with the least accurate measuring tool available - tree rings.