Challenge - Pick any one of these 26 arguments against skeptical theories and prove it's wrong?
To win, you must have references that are at least as good as theirs.
Answer:
The hockey stick is all you need to know, that and the fact that you warmists won't let it go. The whole thing is dependent on tree rings because other proxies don't support the theory. It was also shown that data was selectively truncated to support the notion that the medieval warming period wasn't as warm.
The notion that average global temperatures can be calculated to a tenth of a degree in a CURRENT year is silly enough, but to deduce from tree rings temperatures from a thousand years ago is retarded.
its one of those things that neither side can prove so it ends up as theory and in the big scheme what does it prove. we are here now not a thousand years ago.
Mt. Zion loses. I'll out-argue him myself by simply producing 10 seperate temperature reconstructions which lead to the same conclusion about the recent acceleration of global warming:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/image:2000_...
We don't need the Mann graph. Of course, Zion didn't address Bob's link's explanation of the Mann graph either.
"Most researchers would agree that while the original hockey stick can – and has – been improved in a number of ways, it was not far off the mark. Most later temperature reconstructions fall within the error bars of the original hockey stick. Some show far more variability leading up to the 20th century than the hockey stick, but none suggest that it has been warmer at any time in the past 1000 years than in the last part of the 20th century."
http://environment.newscientist.com/chan...
The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.
More Questions and Answers: