Jim writes:
> The best available estimates of temperatures 1000 years
> ago is the Mann et al. compilation of a variety of temperature
> proxies from around the world -- the famous "hockey stick".
Jim, I wouldn't exactly call Mann's hockey stick the "best available" -- to do that ignores the serious statistical errors that have been found in attempts to replicate his result, including the well-known work by Canadian scientists Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick.
See, for example, McKitrick's page at:
www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/trc.html
and the Nat Post commentary at:
www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=22003a0d-37cc-4399-8bcc-39cd20bed2f6&k=0
There is also an interesting discussion of alternative temperature proxies and the background of the hockey stick phenom at
www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm
Regards,
Jeremy.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dukelow, James S Jr [mailto:jim.dukelow@pnl.gov]
> Sent: 2007 Mar 28 3:31 PM
> To: Whitlock, Jeremy; Cdn-Nucl-LISTSERV (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: [cdn-nucl-l] Climate Change Swindle video panned
>
>
>
>
> Jeremy Whitlock wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.cis.McMaster.CA on behalf of
> Whitlock, Jeremy
> Sent: Wed 3/28/2007 8:38 AM
> To: Cdn-Nucl-LISTSERV (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: [cdn-nucl-l] Climate Change Swindle video panned
>
> I didn't say he had to agree with them. I thought it was
> significant that
> he didn't mention them.
>
> At best Gore makes occasional reference to "so-called sceptics", the
> on-screen audience snickers, and then another cut to Gore and
> his laptop
> flying first-class or cruising in his limo, spewing GHGs.
> Cue the Oscar
> committee.
>
> James, since you specifically call the claim of higher historical
> temperatures a "lie", I'm interested in the alternative
> explanation for
> Greenland being green during the time of the Vikings?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeremy Whitlock
>
> ======================
>
> No, what I claimed was that the graphic that was used in the
> program to claim higher historical temperatures was a lie.
> Martin Durkin's staff first claimed the source for the curve
> was a white paper available on the OISM website, www.oism.org
> . That turned out to be false. They then claimed the source
> was from a climate-sceptic paper in a non-climate-science
> journal. That was true, but Durkin and/or his people had
> "extended" the curve, which ended in the early 80's to the
> year 2000, in a way that "supported" the program's argument,
> and a way that does not agree with actual temperatures over
> that time period. They also smoothed the data, claiming that
> the original NASA data was too "wiggly".
>
> The best available estimates of temperatures 1000 years ago
> is the Mann et al. compilation of a variety of temperature
> proxies from around the world -- the famous "hockey stick".
> It strongly suggests that current temperatures are the
> warmest of the last millennium, but the error band around
> 1000 CE includes the possibility that temperatures were
> slightly warmer then.
>
> The whole story of Durkin's lying graphic is in the URLs
> provided in my posting.
>
> Best regards.
>
> Jim Dukelow
> Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
> Richland, WA
> jim.dukelow@pnl.gov
>
> These comments are mine and have not been reviewed and/or
> approved by my management or by the U.S. Department of Energy.
>
CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED INFORMATION NOTICE This e-mail, and any attachments, may contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright, or exempt from disclosure. Any unauthorized review, disclosure, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or reliance on this information may be unlawful and is strictly prohibited. AVIS D'INFORMATION CONFIDENTIELLE ET PRIVILÉGIÉE Le présent courriel, et toute pièce jointe, peut contenir de l'information qui est confidentielle, régie par les droits d'auteur, ou interdite de divulgation. Tout examen, divulgation, retransmission, diffusion ou autres utilisations non autorisées de l'information ou dépendance non autorisée envers celle-ci peut être illégale et est strictement interdite. |