It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wegman report not reported anywhere!???

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 07:39 PM
link   
The Wegman report came out in the middle of July. There was absolutely zero coverage anywhere. Not TV, not radio, not newspapers. None. It got discussed a bit in the blogs but apparently not here. It is very critical of MBH 98 which formed a significant portion of the IPCC 3rd assessment report. Why do you think the media ignored this landmark paper?

If you haven't read this report, it might be useful to at least read the Executive summary. It is a decent representation of the complete report:

energycommerce.house.gov/108/home/07142006_Wegman_Report.pdf

The complete report follows the summary.




posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 09:52 PM
link   
The hockey stick story and Wegman's testimony was all over the news last summer. Conclusion was no difference would be made in the reconstruction of the hockey stick. Thusly, Wegman's testimony became a non-event of error ridden, circle jerk logic and he was best left forgotten like smelly fart in a crowded theater.

Dummies guide to the latest “Hockey Stick” controversy


The missing piece at the Wegman hearing
So what would have happened to the MBH results if Wegman and his colleagues had been consulted on PC centering conventions at the time? Absolutely nothing.


Even if we completely trashcan Mann’s hockey stick, there are much newer studies with less disputed evidence that reveal the same trend in temperature rise.

Ice Cores May Yield Clues To 5,000-year-old Mystery

Last 50 years 'unusually warm', tropical glaciers melting rapidly finds research


[edit on 3-1-2007 by Regenmacher]



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Probably could have done without the gastric bathroom unprofessional comment. Very good citing an unbiased response from the guy who was being criticized. That is also disputed. And citing a web page that claimed an ice core "May" yield critical information was a nice touch. Lastly, criticizing the President of the Statistical section of the National Acadamy of Science for bad statistics is at best suspect. Other blogs discredit Michael from PA. The reference misses the point by the way. That's because the real point was indefensible. With regard to new information, you probably aren't aware that that sword cuts both ways. As far as news coverage goes, it was discussed in the blogs but for at least two weeks after the report came out, there was only one reference in an opinion blog. This is my last post on ATS. So say anything you want I won't be here to read it. So if it makes you feel better have at it. Your cronies will love it. Scotty, beam me up. I've had about enough of pseudo intellectuals with foul mouths.



new topics
 
0

log in

join