45. John “birther” Samford:
You should read your links:
“The temperatures in this representation of the last 800,000 years were not obtained directly, but based on the fluctuations of global ice volume, and scaled to what is known of conditions during the last glacial maximum. They are meant to represent estimates of the mean surface temperature of the Earth “.
Note the words “not obtained directly” and “meant to represent estimates”.
I was saying there was no one around with a thermometer writing down temperatures. Scientists don’t have historical records. They make estimates based on proxies. That’s one of the things Climate Audit audits, that is the estimates based on the proxies. It’s also one of the things Real Climate makes competing claims about. Right now I trust Climate Audit more, but if the global warming accusers start doing a better job of transparently and rigorously working with the available data I’m confident they can produce higher quality science. I also suspect it will show little or no global warming due to recent man-made CO2 levels. I could be wrong. I wouldn’t be surprised if wide-spread farming starting around 10,000 BC had climate effects. Hopefully few environmentalists will subsequently suggest we give up farming.
47. David S:
The following doesn’t make sense:
“You don’t expect me to conflate meteorology and climate science, do you? Studying the weather is not the same as studying the climate. I’m heartened by the thought that you are continuing your education, and hope that you will bring back some wonderful insights on mesoscale convective systems. Of course, knowledge about thunderstorm systems doesn’t speak to climate science at all.”
Studying the weather and studying the climate are closely related fields. It is well known that current climate models don’t handle water vapor well. Oddly many thinking humans, like me, who are not scientists, would readily recognize that knowledge of thunderstorm systems could be extremely useful in understanding how water vapor effects weather and therefore climate. Thunderstorms are drive by heat as well. So it is patent nonsense on stilts that “knowledge about thunderstorm systems doesn’t speak to climate science at all.” At all? At all? Nothing to say at all? It’s certainly quite reasonable to wonder if the current climate models inability to take into account the action of mesoscale convective systems has compromised their ability to properly predict the future.
I would advise you to make claims that are far less broad. Always, never and “at all” cannot always be avoided, but they are often red flags.
Yours,
Tom DeGisi
