Porker wrote:Sure. The critique you refer to is dated 2004. The paper I referenced is dated 2010.
martine wrote:I suppose we are coming at this from different angles...there are some that believe any errors (mistake or on purpose) damage the credibility so much that you should disregard the whole report (your and Gareth's view I believe). Others like myself, are more concerned with the main conclusions and are perhaps too forgiving of errors .
Gareth wrote:I think that recent events have damaged the reputation and credibility of some of those who have claimed that AGW is proven.
zadocbrown wrote:Actually, statistically another ice age may be due right now.
Porker wrote:I don't know about you folks, but judging by recent reports in the media I would say the wheels are coming off the bandwagon at a pretty rapid rate.
I'll bet one G Brown is mightily regretting labelling those in the sceptic camp as "flat-earthers".
regards
P.
zadocbrown wrote:...Actually, statistically another ice age may be due right now....
Porker wrote:Ol' wiki was cited by me (purely for qotational purposes) a few posts back to much disdain.
MGF wrote:zadocbrown wrote:...Actually, statistically another ice age may be due right now....
I thought you didn't believe in 'statistics'?
Porker wrote:How about having a crack at the discussion concerning the number of temperature measuring stations and the bias introduced by their reduction in numbers? That, to me at least, seems like a pretty interesting piece of evidence.
Return to General Car Chat Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests