JOHN HOWARD IS A CLIMATE CHANGE SKEPTIC.

Thanks Poirot, I think this thread has exposed what I long suspected, That many climate change 'skeptics' don't read the full literature, because they do not actually have access to it. So, they are reduced to either interpreting abstracts, which only gives partial information, or blogs that discuss the papers. There is a danger in that of course, in that many bloggers may introduce unintended errors, or extended misinterpretations of the data.

The blog you link to has one such unintended error, in saying that the data came from '73 locations from around the world', when actually they looked at 73 datasets (records) that were globally distributed.

Graham says that 'it's just one graph', and therefore a 'cherry pick'. Well, actually it isn't Graham, if anything it's a combination of 73 graphs using a variety of proxies and temperature data, including ice cores, pollen, diatoms, Mg/Ca Foraminifera, chironomid lake bed records and more. All the data is given in the supplemental materials.

So, if anything it is the complete opposite to a 'cherry pick'. So, good luck with that line of reasoning. I think it's funny that you say that "all the other graphs that I've seen for the period don't show anything unusual in the last 100 years". And that's not a cherry pick? Which graphs are these pray tell? Without access to the scientific literature, they must have been posted on those blogsites you love so much.

Why is it that all of this sort of stuff was common knowledge among undergraduates 50 years ago and is now all of a sudden NEW!

John Howard is a climate change skeptic! Don't you get it? It's all about a large and powerful minority wanting to ignore or wish away the problem all in the name of greed masquerading as progress.

Thanks Bugsy,

I take your point on unintended errors. When this paper broke, several media sites misconstrued "the unprecedented rate of temperature rise" and erroneously claimed that the earth was the hottest it's been in 11,300 years. Things do get skewed out here in layman's land.

It's so obvious that a scientist has a better handle on the processes involved and the meaning of the data. Hope you guys continue to make forays into the fray, even though it's frustrating.

I appreciate you contributing.

And the beat goes on...

http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/03/10/climate-denial-industry-hits-courts-and-hollywood-threats-fly?utm

Hi there Titanic Deckchair attendants.
Still at it I see.
Not to worry the sea temps are rising rapidly, so it will be warm as it rises up to your neck.