Posted on 09/27/2006 4:39:37 AM PDT by poncho67
Climate alarmists have been attempting to erase the inconvenient Medieval Warm Period from the Earth’s climate history for at least a decade. David Deming, an assistant professor at the University of Oklahoma’s College of Geosciences, can testify first hand about this effort. Dr. Deming was welcomed into the close-knit group of global warming believers after he published a paper in 1995 that noted some warming in the 20th century. Deming says he was subsequently contacted by a prominent global warming alarmist and told point blank “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” When the “Hockey Stick” first appeared in 1998, it did just that.
(Excerpt) Read more at epw.senate.gov ...
The Climate Division of the Ministry of Truth continues to airbrush the Medieval Warm Period from the temperature record.
I guess banning DDT didn't kill enough people for the lefties.
That's not as bad as "Global warming!, No. Ice age!, No Global Warming!, No. Climate Change! Quick, give me lots of money and I will make it stop!."
There's no comparison between the two at all. The CO2-caused warmth is relatively slight versus the CFC's that were clearly linked to ozone depletion by rather precise measurements. If you are confident in the predictions of warming beyond the 1 degree C from increased CO2, then why don't we use those same models to determine the most cost effective solution to the warming? There are many possibilities such as aerosols which are much cheaper and much more precise cooling strategies if they are ultimately needed.
Hell, I just wish it would quit raining. It would make fishing alot more fun.
It's pretty simplistic, even straw-mannish, to say that each of these arguments has followed in a single-file line. Why would you set up a straw man?
Documenting and discussing all of the errors and misconceptions and strawmen in this speech would take 2-3 months of daily postings. It's typical Inhofe. I shudder in start amazement every time I read something like this from him.
For starters, RealClimate responded to a previous Inhofe statement with this article:
Senator Inhofe on Climate Change
It's illuminating.
It's by Michael Mann and others. Sorry, but I'm a bit skeptical of anything by Mann.
I'm more than a bit skeptical of anything that Sen. Inhofe says about climate, so we're even. But why not evaluate the content and not the author? Compare and contrast what RealClimate says to other statements on the same subjects. Examine the expertise of those making the statements. (Argument from authority is precarious, but I'd probably be a little more respectful of statement about climate change from someone trained in a relevant discipline than a proctologist.) Examine potential biases and their likely influence. Etc.
That, after all, is what intellectual inquiry entails. Shooting the messenger doesn't accomplish much in the way of knowledge acquisition.
Inhofe provided a lot of content to evaluate. I've already done that for a lot of the subjects he touches on. I've concluded what I need to conclude about Inhofe's grasp of the subject and his potential biases.
There were papers that I read in the Mid-80's that said the left HAD to embrace Global Whoring, because it was thier Socialist ticket to power after the fall of the Soviet Union....
All you have to do is lok at where the MONEY is going behind this, and you'll find all kinds of Socialist/Communist fronts...
www.discoverthenetwork.com
"We are blessed with the ability to adapt, and that's how the human race has survived both heat waves and blizzards, floods and droughts."
And Democrats!
Holes in the corona have been correlated with the global surface temperature. If the corona is changing significantly and aspects of it have been correlated with the global temperature, could there not be effects on earth such as the temperature increases of the last 30-40 years?
I don't believe that Mann's hockey stick is a realistic model of global temperature. For many years I would read various scientific journals in the library of a top scientific lab at least once a week. I saw in those journals a number of confirmations around the world of the Little Ice Age and/or the Medieval Warm Period. So I view with skepticism any representation of global temperature over the last millennium that doesn't find indications of a significant Medieval Warm Period.
Mann cites various peer reviewed papers in the defense of his hockey stick in the link you provided. I've not read the papers he linked to. However, I've published a number of peer reviewed papers in the scientific literature myself and have seen papers by others slip through without adequate peer review. It can happen if papers are routed to friendly reviewers. I have not followed Mann's work close enough to judge whether that has occurred with his papers.
As a PhD math modeler, I look at the estimated temperature record of the last 150 or so years and am amazed that some people point to greenhouse gases as the cause of the increase in temperature. Some certainly, but not all. I look at the temperature record and conclude that considerably more is going on than effects by greenhouse gas. To do justice to my beliefs, I'd have to launch into math modeling of the global temperature myself and probably spend several years at it. Unfortunately, I don't have the time required to do that, so just call me a scientifically trained lay skeptic of Mann's work. I probably fall into the Lindzen camp.
"Examine the expertise of those making the statements. (Argument from authority is precarious, but I'd probably be a little more respectful of statement about climate change from someone trained in a relevant discipline than a proctologist.) Examine potential biases and their likely influence"
EXACTLY!!! That's exactly the test I used to evaluate Al Gore's various convoluted statements, omissions, half truths and outright lies on this subject.
As a result of your lenghty analysis of Sen. Inhofe's statements, I assume you have compiled a list of his misstatements??
great post. thanks
Touche! LOL.
Global "Warming:" Much ado about something we can't prove or change. It's a short-term anti-capitalist political strategem. Long-term our species must adapt or die. Meanwhile, carpe diem.
Reinventing the wheel. I don't have enough time to do what others have already done. Example below.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.