Michael Mann: Harper's War on Science

[captain morgan]

You have reached an internally inconsistent conclusion. You stated initally that there is no way to determine temperatures 1000 years ago.. Then you go on to say that the climate constantly changes. How do you know that? If you can't determine the emperature in the past then your conclusion should be "Climate may or may not change, I don't know."

The biggest problem with the AGW position is that there has been no baseline established for what is normal or abnormal temperature fluctuations.

The relevant part of the temperature reconstructions is not just the last 15-20 years. Nor does the temperature reconstruction "predict" anything. It attempts to estimate the temperatures using proxies such as tree rings. Nor is Mann's the only reconstruction. There have been many. They all reach similar conclusions. Most have current temperatures higher than the MWP.

The advent of numerous periods of glaciation in addition to the intermittent warming periods is concrete proof that there are severe fluctuations..... Regardless of the conclusions and models stating gloom 'n doom, the facts lend far more support to natural cycles than to man made inputs

 

[petros]

Well, that depends. from Colpy's point of view the temperatures in the past are unknown, because he's stated that tyhey can't be determined.

From my point of view, the question is what cycle caused the higher temperatures in the past?

Climate isn't static during interglacial periods. Normal for earth is continental glaciation and it's coming back sooner than you think.

 

[EagleSmack]

Climate isn't static during interglacial periods. Normal for earth is continental glaciation and it's coming back sooner than you think.

Petros... can we pay it to be static?

 

[petros]

Like parking a car?

 

[EagleSmack]

Like parking a car?

Yes... can we pay to have the climate park itself?

 

[petros]

Yes... can we pay to have the climate park itself?

$2 an hour $20 all day or $150 monthly. Sound good? Lets pitch it to IMPark.

 

[Zipperfish]

The biggest problem with the AGW position is that there has been no baseline established for what is normal or abnormal temperature fluctuations.

I agree the term normal has its limits. The issue is "would it be cooler on this planet right now, without us here." That dodges the normal question. I think there's a lot of evidence that it would be.

The advent of numerous periods of glaciation in addition to the intermittent warming periods is concrete proof that there are severe fluctuations..... Regardless of the conclusions and models stating gloom 'n doom, the facts lend far more support to natural cycles than to man made inputs

I disagree. Certainly for CO2, you have to find some pretty hardcore skeptics who don't believe that humans aren't increasing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. If that is the case, then, to my mind, you would expect a measurable temp difference based on the magnitude of teh CO2 increase--and that's what we have seen.

 

[petros]

Where is the temp increase that is suppose to follow the CO2 or does temp lead CO2 in rising?

 

[EagleSmack]

$2 an hour $20 all day or $150 monthly. Sound good? Lets pitch it to IMPark.

I just want the climate the way it used to be.

 

[Locutus]

lmao

 

[captain morgan]

I agree the term normal has its limits. The issue is "would it be cooler on this planet right now, without us here." That dodges the normal question. I think there's a lot of evidence that it would be.

You can comfortably say that about any form of life.

I disagree. Certainly for CO2, you have to find some pretty hardcore skeptics who don't believe that humans aren't increasing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. If that is the case, then, to my mind, you would expect a measurable temp difference based on the magnitude of teh CO2 increase--and that's what we have seen.

Natural causes far eclipse any man made contributions. One Mt St. Helen's, active volcanic activity, seismic shifts that release methane (among other things) let alone lightening strikes starting massive forest fires will be the major driving forces.

 

[Walter]

It was warmer thousands of years ago because Adam and Eve didn't wear clothes in the Garden and there is no documentation that they were cold.

 

[BaalsTears]

Professor Mann had the Mann Act named after him.

 

[taxslave]

I just want the climate the way it used to be.

I was hoping it would warm up some. Still too cold here in the winter.

 

[petros]

What's your version of cold? I'll in the lower mainland next week, should I pack a sweater?

 

[darkbeaver]

Sure it has. At one point the earth was probably a mass of boiling lava.

A blob of plasma. We observe blobs of same spat out of the suns.

 

[taxslave]

What's your version of cold? I'll in the lower mainland next week, should I pack a sweater?

Probably a rain coat next week. And a sweater. No parka.
I'm going to Kitimat next week. I'll take an extra pair of longjohns.

 

[petros]

In other words just my Stealth Hoodie from TAD will be just fine.

 

[taxslave]

In other words just my Stealth Hoodie from TAD will be just fine.

If you venture out to Surrey the hoodie will fir right in.

 

[petros]

If you venture out to Surrey the hoodie will fir right in.

TAD is far too high class for Surrey.

Stealth Hoodie