NASA: Only 10 Years Till Irreversable Climatic Danger Point

Originally posted by Muaddib
It is not just "those researchers/scientists, but the dozens others who contradict your claims as well as those of Mann et al.

As to why I believe their research more than what you post? I am pretty sure I have explained it several times already.

Not really, what you do is present a handful of cherry-picked single region proxies, claim these to prove your point, whilst totally ignoring the high resolution multiple-proxy reconstructions.

I can account for the single regional proxies, all they show is that at some point in a few hundred year period it was likely to be warmer than it is currently at that location alone.

Anyway, onto my main point. This Quelccaya ice core data is a product of work by the Glaciologist, Lonnie Thompson from Ohio. He has multiple proxies as well, you know

When we use all six of Thompson's ice-cores (3 from South America - including Quelccaya; 3 from the Tibetan Plateau), we find a rather interesting outcome:


www-bprc.mps.ohio-state.edu...

Oh noes, the data is another validation of Mann's work...

This is why single region cherrypicked proxies tell us nothing but what was happening at that location at some time in a 400-500 year period. We need proxies from numerous regions that cover a these periods in high resolution. So it was probably quite warm on the Quelccaya ice sheet at some point during that period....but it wasn't to the same extent in regions close to it.

So these ice-core proxies are yet another strand of support for the numerous high resolution multiple-proxy reconstructions from multiple researchers.

What you are doing is like taking 10 cherrypicked 6ft 7in women and comparing them to a random sample of men, then concluding women are taller than men.

[edit on 5-6-2007 by melatonin]

Originally posted by Rilence
Agreed, Grover

There has been much pot and kettle calling going on thru this thread and a large portion of it has come from Mr M...

Well since melatonin would never post any information from any scientists which refute his claim, it is only fair that others such as myself post that information which will lead to a discussion.

What i always find strange with members like yourself and grover, who is still in ignore since he never contributes anything to any discussion and only makes ad hominem attacks, is that for some reason you don't discuss the topic.

My guess is that some people just want to hear what the "let's blame mankind crowd" have to say, for whatever motive, and for some reason some members don't like to be presented with evidence which refutes the AGW claim.

[edit on 5-6-2007 by Muaddib]

[edit on 5-6-2007 by Muaddib]

Wow, melatonin once again producing Mann's data as the ultimate truth. who would have thought?...

The evidence, which melatonin (also known as Regenmacher) wants to dismiss, and which has been done by researchers which are not part of Mann's circle of friends, and which includes scientists from Africa, South America, North America, Canada, China, Japan, Spain, Germany and Austria amongs others all point to the same conclusion... The Roman Warming period, the Medieval Warming period, and the Little Ice Age were all "global events" and the record shows that the RWM and the MWP were warmer than at present.

Chinese researchers sharply disagree. Chinese temperature history, collected from such sources as peat bogs, lakebed sediments, ice cores, and tree rings, shows:

China was warmest between the year 1 AD and the year 240 AD (during Europe’s Roman Warming).
China then had a colder period from AD 240800, coinciding with the cold European weather of the Dark Ages.
China had warmer weather from AD 8001400, essentially the years of Europe’s Medieval Climate Optimum.
China cooled again between 1400 and 1820 (roughly the period of Europe’s Little Ice Age. (That’s when the Vikings who had settled Greenland during the Medieval Warming starved or froze to death.)
China’s current warming cycle began in the early 1800s, as did the recent warming in Europe and North America.

Overpeck’s suggestion that the Medieval Warming was a Europe-only event is controversial, but a number of climate researchers have said, “Research has failed to identify any known natural climate-forcing mechanism that could have generated all of the ‘unprecedented warming’ of the 20th century.”
Of course, it is at least as unlikely that Europe could have maintained a temperature substantially higher than the rest of the planet for more than 300 years.

Fortunately, recent U.S. research breaks the theoretical deadlock. A team led by Dr. Gerard Bond of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory (affiliated with New York’s Columbia University) recently released its analysis of seabed cores from the North Atlantic that go back 12,000 years. Looking at iceberg debris, the Bond team found nine global warmings and nine global coolings in a cycle that averaged 1340 years and coincided exactly with a known cycle in the sun’s magnetic activity.

The Chinese climate history, published recently in Geophysical Research Letters, further validates the Bond team’s seabed core findings. It also tosses into a cocked hat both the idea of stable earth temperatures and the idea that Europe could have a climate separate from the rest of the Earth.

www.cgfi.org...

But despite the fact that it has been corroborated by research in several countries all which show the RWP, the MWP, and the LIA, were not only globla, but the Climate Changes which happened around the world coincided with those events known as RWP, MWP, and LIA; you get people like melatonin, who want to believe Mann, even after his research has been discredited.



[edit on 5-6-2007 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by Muaddib
Wow, melatonin once again producing Mann's data as the ultimate truth. who would have thought?...

It's not just about Mann though.

The fact is that Mann's work has been corroborated by several other large scale multi-proxy studies, even the researcher who produced one of YOUR cherrypicked proxies has a study that is totally consistent with all the others - when all his ice-core data is used.

As I said, the best you have is cherrypicked data, as clearly shown by the Quelccaya ice-core.

As for ultimate truth, I don't think I've ever claimed I, or anyone else, have it on this issue. Just a lot of data that supports my position, and that of major scientific organisations around the world.

The data says that current warming is most likely to a greater level, more synchronous, and over a far greater area than at any time for 1000 years.

The handful of 6ft 7in women you produce don't really matter, the large scale data speaks for itself.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by melatonin]

Originally posted by Muaddib
What i always find strange with members like yourself and grover, who is still in ignore since he never contributes anything to any discussion and only makes ad hominem attacks, is that for some reason you don't discuss the topic.

An ad hominem attack for you Muaddib is for someone to question your data and your methods... I have not only contributed to ATSNN, I have discussed the issues on this thread... repeatedly; You just don't like being questioned and held to task for your own double standards. And being on ignore by you is no skin off my ample arse thank you very much... In fact I consider it a badge of honor to be ignored by you.

[edit on 5-6-2007 by grover]

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by Rilence
Agreed, Grover

There has been much pot and kettle calling going on thru this thread and a large portion of it has come from Mr M...

Well since melatonin would never post any information from any scientists which refute his claim, it is only fair that others such as myself post that information which will lead to a discussion.

What i always find strange with members like yourself and grover, who is still in ignore since he never contributes anything to any discussion and only makes ad hominem attacks, is that for some reason you don't discuss the topic.

My guess is that some people just want to hear what the "let's blame mankind crowd" have to say, for whatever motive, and for some reason some members don't like to be presented with evidence which refutes the AGW claim.

[edit on 5-6-2007 by Muaddib]

[edit on 5-6-2007 by Muaddib]

Actually Muaddib, I personally prefer to hear both sides of this matter....Somewhere between the opposing views of man made warming Vs natural warming, we will find the cause of all this

And thru that, possible actions which may reduce the effects on humanity

Thats all I'm about really...I dont fully support either theory at this time

Well Muaddib do YOU ever post material from scientists that refute YOUR claims? NO! Not once, not ever from what I have seen.... so again stop holding others to standards that you yourself do not meet.

Originally posted by Rilence
I mean, c'mon...Is 1% or so of GDP over the medium term too much to pay for lessening the affects of what might happen ?

Personally I see it as a form of insurance, and that is something I'm more than prepared to pay in the form of higher energy, food and transport prices, etc...

so, that is the lowest common denominator: pay your tribute and you're safe.

what do you think is funneling 1% of the GDP to a special interest group going to accomplish? who's going to benefit how, exactly?

do you even know how much money 1% of the GDP is? in many countries, it's enough to support their entire military. you make it sound as if it was peanuts - it isn't. it's a whole lot of money which isn't just going to be misse dby taxpayers, it would certainly be misused for a misguided 'war on climate', focusing on a single factor, while protection of ecosystems is put on the back burner in favor of questionable biofuels, which are to this day still being produced primarily from food sources.

Originally posted by grover
Ya know this really gets tedious... a person starts a thread on the subject of global warming (among others) ,and it is only a matter of time before SOME PEOPLE (and it is often the same people) show up and start ganging up on others who disagree with them and flood the thread with endless posts that have the effect of killing, not just the thread, but even the desire to seriously discuss the matter. Eventually it falls apart into a tit for tat snit match. It has become endemic and has become a determent to ATSNN and any validity it might have.

Can't the moderators do something about this?

I agree completely! Thank you, it's about time someone said something to this effect.