Even the Pope sides with Futurecurrents

Discussion in 'Politics' started by nitro, Jun 16, 2015.


  1. I gave you facts. The chart. You simply deny the facts. That's idiotic. So it's fair to call you an idiot.
     
    #2141     Nov 16, 2016
  2. Buy1Sell2

    Buy1Sell2

    The chart is bogus.
     
    #2142     Nov 16, 2016
  3. gwb-trading

    gwb-trading

    Your "facts" are a fantasy. Your chart is a fallacy.
     
    #2143     Nov 16, 2016
    Buy1Sell2 likes this.
  4. L

    Details of the claims and counterclaims involve lengthy and arcane statistical arguments, so let’s skip straight to the 2006 report of the US National Academy of Science (pdf). The academy was asked by Congress to assess the validity of temperature reconstructions, including the hockey stick.

    “Array of evidence”
    The report states: “The basic conclusion of Mann et al. (1998, 1999) was that the late 20th century warmth in the Northern Hemisphere was unprecedented during at least the last 1000 years. This conclusion has subsequently been supported by an array of evidence that includes both additional large-scale surface temperature reconstructions and pronounced changes in a variety of local proxy indicators, such as melting on ice caps and the retreat of glaciers around the world”.

    https://www.newscientist.com/articl...the-hockey-stick-graph-has-been-proven-wrong/
     
    #2144     Nov 16, 2016
  5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_graph

    More than two dozen reconstructions, using various statistical methods and combinations of proxy records, have supported the broad consensus shown in the original 1998 hockey-stick graph, with variations in how flat the pre-20th century "shaft" appears.[12][13] The 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment Report cited 14 reconstructions, 10 of which covered 1,000 years or longer, to support its strengthened conclusion that it was likely that Northern Hemisphere temperatures during the 20th century were the highest in at least the past 1,300 years.[14] Over a dozen subsequent reconstructions, including Mann et al. 2008 and PAGES 2k Consortium 2013, have supported these general conclusions.
     
    #2145     Nov 16, 2016

  6. And you are a troll. Or both. I'm going with both. You are essentially saying the National Academy of Science is wrong.
     
    #2146     Nov 16, 2016
  7. Buy1Sell2

    Buy1Sell2

    What you have quoted here is false on it's face. In fact, temperatures were higher between 1200 and 1300 than they are now. --and that's within the last 1000 years. So, this quotation is woefully inaccurate and agenda driven.
     
    #2147     Nov 16, 2016
  8. Buy1Sell2

    Buy1Sell2

    #2148     Nov 16, 2016
  9. gwb-trading

    gwb-trading

    The "Hockey Stick" -- what a joke!!!
     
    #2149     Nov 16, 2016
    Buy1Sell2 likes this.

  10. So you are saying that the experts are wrong.
     
    #2150     Nov 16, 2016