saying we just don't know enough yet? They're saying that many of the studies don't seem to really say what their authors are saying that they say. When you dig into them, you find proxies being used for things they don't represent, statistical errors (both mathematical and conceptual), self-selecting methodologies, "independent" studies by close associates of the original authors that reuse the same datasets as the one they are "verifying" and using the same known-to-be-flawed methods, finding various publications peer review process doesn't include looking at either the data or what calculations were done on it, proxies for which the originator can't say where they got them, and many other flaws which make the studies *meaningless*.
By and large they take no position on what is. They are primarily pointing out that what IS being put out there on the subject of AGW is not science, or is at best merely an inkling worthy of investigation not a conclusion.
When you dig into them, you find proxies being used for things they don't represent, statistical errors (both mathematical and conceptual), self-selecting methodologies, "independent" studies by close associates of the original authors that reuse the same datasets as the one they are "verifying" and using the same known-to-be-flawed methods, finding various publications peer review process doesn't include looking at either the data or what calculations were done on it, proxies for which the originator can't say where they got them, and many other flaws which make the studies *meaningless*.
What makes me irate is that individuals associated with the IPCC are constantly going back and retro-tweaking data that has been around for years because the old data is "inconvenient truth". From ClimateAudit.org from a Tuesday thread, a Jan-Anders Grannes posts:
I just had a look at the new Jones et al for 2006 for Arctic 70N-90N 180E/W and what a BIG surprise!! Until for 1 week ago, with the period 1930-2005 we had the following 12 warmest Arctic years:
Year Anomaly degrees C
1938 2.030988
2005 1.971766
1937 1.856739
1944 1.600208
1998 1.413495
1934 1.371807
1981 1.363475
1947 1.272157
1943 1.212582
1954 1.132263
1953 1.086665
2002 1.075276
But today I had a look at the new Jones et al 1930-2006 and the list have been somewhat modefied!!
2005 2.032369
2006 1.891971
1937 1.806445
1938 1.562015
1947 1.593568
1944 1.544973
1998 1.285725
1943 1.251363
1940 1.200875
1934 1.137410
2002 1.129200
2003 1.029881
If nothing happens today you can always change the past to make people feel that today is changeing?
Notice how 1938 lost about a half a degree Celsius just like that??? A half-degree Celsius is almost as much as the entire warming trend of the entire century (IF you believe the data and that the trend was not mainly Urban Heat Island effect).