Climate science challenge: What is the counterpoint to this skeptical criticism? 'Mikes Nature Trick' Revisited- @ScottAdamsSays edition https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/21/mikes-nature-trick-revisited-scottadamssays-edition/ … via @WattsUpWithThat
-
-
Why not strike the word "majority" in that sentence? Its use is tendentious.
-
Good science focuses on evidence, not putative majorities. If the tree rings are bad evidence, then dump it and reconsider your conclusions. Also consider the use of manipulated date to support a hypothesis to be a red flag prompting closer scrutiny of other evidence as well.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Scott, because even those proxies have problems, not just in their sensitivity, but in their application. Ex: Mann in later paper used river sediments, but plotted 4 of them upside down. Refused to admit. seehttps://climateaudit.org/2009/10/14/upside-side-down-mann-and-the-peerreviewedliterature/ …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"Using Tiljander data upside down gave the answer that they expected and thus they probably didn’t question it." Confirmation bias is the biggest problem in climate science, IMHO.
-
Let me be frank, never in my wildest imagination would I have believed a field of science would be so badly managed. You cannot trust anything that these scientists claim. They could be right or wrong, but we won't know because it is fully politicized.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
What proxies other than tree rings are there? Ice cores, sediments, what else? Sediments themselves are sketchy AFAIK. How well do ice cores track with modern temperature records?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Which proxies are those?
-
I think this is a question that needs answering. Just throwing out the offhand comment that "other proxies support the majority view" is simply begging the question. This statement needs some real evidence to support it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Non tree-ring proxies do not support the hockey stick view of recent climate history at all.pic.twitter.com/TgJBA9WfR4
-
Why do climate scientists say the opposite. Are you looking at the same data?
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.