Eric's politically motivated non sequitur on the hockey stick? My reference was to a discussion around Kevin Trenberth's statement to the effect that it was a travesty that we couldn't say why global surface temperatures hadn't increased over the past decade. These emails were posted on junkscience - which came up in a google search but they are available and discussed widely. I have heard this statement discussed by Tim Flannery amongst others on Aussie TV but I wasn't allowed to refer to it here. The emails are discussed very broadly in the public arena but Eric felt in necessary to moderate out first one and then 2 postings. See for instance John Cook at Skeptical science - but don't take a politically motivated site as gospel (see below - pun intended). Cook, IMHO, is a one eyed idiot.
So I had to refer to 2 peer reviewed documents - see 'no warming for a decade'. I take it Steve Milloy has waxed lyrical on the hockey stick or the Wegman Report or both? This is the original hockey stick: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hockey_stick_chart_ipcc_large.jpg The 2006 NAS report states: 'Based on the analyses presented in the original papers by Mann et al. and this newer supporting evidence, the committee finds it plausible that the Northern Hemisphere was warmer during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period over the preceding millennium. The substantial uncertainties currently present in the quantitative assessment of large-scale surface temperature changes prior to about A.D. 1600 lower our confidence in this conclusion compared to the high level of confidence we place in the Little Ice Age cooling and 20th century warming. Even less confidence can be placed in the original conclusions by Mann et al. (1999) that "the 1990s are likely the warmest decade, and 1998 the warmest year, in at least a millennium" because the uncertainties inherent in temperature reconstructions for individual years and decades are larger than those for longer time periods, and because not all of the available proxies record temperature information on such short timescales." This is the revised temperature reconstruction from multiple sources: http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11676&page=2 Here is another reconstruction that excludes tree rings. Please note that I am not endorsing free Sunday school lessons - it was simply the first non-paywalled source I came across this morning while searching the title. Makes you wonder what they are teaching in Sunday school these days? http://www.freesundayschoollessons.org/pdfs/climate-history.pdf I am just not all that interested in temperature reconstructions - the uncertainties are too large to draw detailed conclusions. On Feb 11, 12:51 am, Eric Swanson <[email protected]> wrote: > A comment for Robert I. Ellison to chew on regarding the Wegman > Report: > > http://www.desmogblog.com/wegmans-report-highly-politicized-and-fatal... > > And you think that a scientist should accept Steven Milloy's > JunkScience as a valid source? > > E. S. > --- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of global environmental change. Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not gratuitously rude. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
