Climate Change Deniers--Read More

Posted by hrymzk 6 years, 11 months ago to Science
2 comments | Share | Flag

Research result published in peer-reviewed journal, Climate Dynamics April, 2014. Conducted by geophysicist Dr. Shaun Lovejoy of McGill University, Montreal. He looked at records of tree rings, ice cores, cores of the ocean floor and lake sediments. This kind of data offers insight into hemispheric and global climate fluctuations over hundreds, thousands or in some cases even hundreds of thousands of years. For instance, some ice cores from the South Pole can offer a blueprint of climate fluctuations over the past 800,000 years. Lovejoy's study indicates with a confidence greater than 99% that the rate of climate change that has taken place over the past 125 years cannot be ascribed to natural cycles. Lovejoy's study indicates with a confidence greater than 99% that the rate of climate change that has taken place over the past 125 years cannot be ascribed to natural cycles

And I’m still not interested in the fringe, far-out statements that keep being parroted.

Harry M
SOURCE URL: http://phys.org/news/2014-04-statistical-analysis-natural-warming-hypothesis-percent.html


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by dbhalling 6 years, 11 months ago
    Garbage in Garbage out. The study requires the assumption that the temperature data he uses is accurate. If for instance, he uses data that shows substantial warming, then he is going to reach his forgone conclusion. It is well known that the warmest period in the US was in the 1930s. It is hard to see with this information that natural variation could not explain this change. Would his model have shown that this 1930s variation was not due to natural variation. The Little Ice age was a period of rapid cooling would his model find that this was not a natural cycle? What about the fact that temperatures have remained flat to declining for over a decade.

    AGW prophets cannot be taken seriously, because they consistently lie about the underlying data. Did Dr. Lovejoy come out and condemn Al Gore and the by Mann, Bradley & Hughes? No then he is not credible.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 6 years, 11 months ago
    There is no one global climate. And climates,by definition, don't change. Weather changes.

    Gee, temperature and other data since the 1500s suggests the planet is warming... Gee, hardly surprising, since we're still coming out of a freaking ICE AGE.

    "To assess the natural variability before much human interference, the new study uses "multi-proxy climate reconstructions" developed by scientists in recent years to estimate historical temperatures, as well as fluctuation-analysis techniques from nonlinear geophysics."


    Key words: "...developed by scientists in recent years". Would these be the same frauds who go by the title of *climate* "scientist"?

    He admits they're cooking the books, and you swallow the rest...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo