Australian Politics Forum - Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics

John_Taverner Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2217 Gender:	Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics Reply #90 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 2:52pm lee wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 12:42pm: When are you going to admit that the reconstructions don't do warming blips? I'm sure that there were warming blips, but we're talking about overall trend here.
Back to top	IP Logged

John_Taverner Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2217 Gender:	Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics Reply #91 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 2:56pm lee wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 12:42pm: John_Taverner wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 11:29am: There are plenty of other reconstructions over a shorter time frame, and I have already posted one graph showing some of these. Mann? You're not paying attention. These ones for a start:
Back to top	IP Logged

John_Taverner

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2217
Gender: male

Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics
Reply #92 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 3:08pm

Ajax wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2016 at 9:11am:

For anyone who is unsure, go to this site, it shows 120 proxy studies that confirm the medieval warm period (look at all the locations that have been explored), that shows temperatures back then were at least as warm as today if not warmer.

For anybody who can't be bothered checking out those studies (including Ajax) , I chose one study at random. It was extremely localised, the data ended in 1976, and it didn't even show that the Medieval Warm period was warmer than 1976, let alone today.

Check the trend line for yourself:

Back to top

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21782 Gender:	Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics Reply #93 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 3:18pm John_Taverner wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 3:08pm: and it didn't even show that the Medieval Warm period was warmer than 1976, let alone today. You mean it agreed with the IPCC?
Back to top	IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21782
Gender: male

Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics
Reply #94 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 3:23pm

John_Taverner wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 2:52pm:

I'm sure that there were warming blips, but we're talking about overall trend here.

What is a climate trend - 30 years? 200 years? 400 years?
But why are you sure this is not a blip? Why was cooling so good? Skating on the Thames? Dying of hypothermia?

Is the world going into a naturally warming phase or is it the dread CO2?

Colder temps poorer crops?

Don't you just love the sinusoidal waveform, even though it is increasing? One wonders what effects are not incorporated into the climate models.

Back to top

IP Logged

John_Taverner Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2217 Gender:	Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics Reply #95 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 4:27pm lee wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 3:18pm: John_Taverner wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 3:08pm: and it didn't even show that the Medieval Warm period was warmer than 1976, let alone today. You mean it agreed with the IPCC? I mean that it contradicted what Ajax said that it showed. (Ajax lied)
Back to top	IP Logged

John_Taverner

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2217
Gender: male

Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics
Reply #96 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 4:29pm

lee wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 3:23pm:

John_Taverner wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 2:52pm:

I'm sure that there were warming blips, but we're talking about overall trend here.

What is a climate trend - 30 years? 200 years? 400 years?

"Since the last Ice Age" according to your statement. That's about 12,000 years.

Warming since the last Ice Age, you said. Shocked

Do you dispute that you said that?

lee wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 3:23pm:

Is the world going into a naturally warming phase or is it the dread CO2?

I think you know what the science says. What do you think, and why?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Apr 5^th, 2016 at 4:34pm by John_Taverner »

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21782
Gender: male

Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics
Reply #97 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 4:52pm

John_Taverner wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 4:29pm:

"Since the last Ice Age" according to your statement. That's about 12,000 years.

It is warmer than 12,000 years ago.

John_Taverner wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 4:29pm:

I think you know what the science says.

There's the science and the "science". According to AGW religion it is all CO2. Natural variation cannot explain it (Hansen 1988). However the "pause " or the "hiatus", which drew upon about 60 odd peer-reviewed papers had a "consensus" that it was mostly "natural". So natural variation couldn't explain the warming but can explain the slowdown in the face of rising CO2.

The science says all things being equal a rise in CO2 may have some effect on temperature. But all things are not equal.

Back to top

IP Logged

John_Taverner

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2217
Gender: male

Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics
Reply #98 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 7:58pm

lee wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 4:52pm:

John_Taverner wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 4:29pm:

"Since the last Ice Age" according to your statement. That's about 12,000 years.

It is warmer than 12,000 years ago.

That's right genius, because 12,000 years ago, we were just coming out of the last glaciation.

It's quite amusing that you are avoiding the truth of the matter though.

The curve looks a bit like an inverted J though. Do you agree?

Back to top

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21782 Gender:	Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics Reply #99 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 8:30pm John_Taverner wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 7:58pm: The curve looks a bit like an inverted J though. Do you agree? Over what time period?
Back to top	IP Logged

John_Taverner Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2217 Gender:	Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics Reply #100 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 9:48pm lee wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 8:30pm: John_Taverner wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 7:58pm: The curve looks a bit like an inverted J though. Do you agree? Over what time period? 12,000 years of course. You need to focus.
Back to top	IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21782 Gender:	Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics Reply #101 - Apr 5^th, 2016 at 10:52pm John_Taverner wrote on Apr 5^th, 2016 at 9:48pm: 12,000 years of course. You need to focus. I thought you were referencing your last graph.
Back to top	IP Logged

John_Taverner

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2217
Gender: male

Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics
Reply #102 - Apr 6^th, 2016 at 4:49am

I think I have done enough to demonstrate just how dishonest you are. Even though it's plain to see, you refuse to acknowledge that the graph that you posted shows a slight cooling trend after the earth came out of the last glaciation about 12,000 years ago right up to the onset of industrialisation.

In terms of temperature reconstruction studies over the past 2000 years, there have been at least 24 of them, many of which refer to specific localities. Some show a pronounced medieval warming period and some do not.

Back to top

IP Logged

John_Taverner Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2217 Gender:	Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics Reply #103 - Apr 6^th, 2016 at 7:43am For example, this graph shows reconstructed temperatures for Australia over the last 1000 years. There are far fewer bumps than some of the Northern Hemisphere examples.
Back to top	IP Logged

John_Taverner Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2217 Gender:	Re: Boiled Frogs use Flawed Metrics Reply #104 - Apr 6^th, 2016 at 7:53am You can get a better feel for variability with this graph which shows some newer studies. There is a pronounced Medieval Warming period in some, but not all. The so-called little Ice Age is just a continuation of the cooling trend that occurred right up to the beginning of industrialisation.
Back to top	multiplestudies.gif (30 KB \| 52 ) IP Logged