Continuing Problems with Paleoclimate Proxies

A major problem when looking at graphs like the Hockey stick is how they are constructed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That looks like a long flat line. But at the ending there are extremely tiny upticks too small to see with your eyes.

So how can Mann fool you.
Bingo, the time scale gets shorter by a lot but the temperature suddenly is rapidly upticking.
Say temperature goes up by a tiny number.
Simply graph the uptick enormously to make small numbers seem exaggerated upwards.
We see the public then thinks the rise of temperature is very alarming.
They call that the hockey stick.

 

I do not believe we can control climate. Making all the fuss over warming moot and a waste of time.
I once spent a lot of time debunking the alarmists. I just dip in today a bit for the show.

This man below has massive credentials. First he has published over 230 papers to have peer reviewed. Second his income was as the head of climate at MIT. Third he was one of the IPCC scientists until he saw what was happening. His report was part of the IPCC report. How can you get any better than that. He holds a doctorate degree.

 

Ask anybody to PROVE the Driver is actually CO2 and prove using science that the impact is dramatic as alarmists believe and they resort to name calling, calling our sources BS and so forth. I call their bunko science BS.

 

If you are part of a group, say you want to promote electric cars, battery use, and rid the world of using liquid fuels, such as gasoline and diesel, how can you accomplish this increase to your economy. Recall Biden claims going to green energy produces jobs.

Rather than prove your case, attack liquid fuels. Use that system. Call liquid fuels dirty. That tarnishes the name of fuels. Call the others clean. That makes them seem as angels out to save us all.
But attack daily those calling the alarmists bunko artists.
Declare that of thousands of scientists a small collection known as the IPCC are the true global leaders of science. d
I believe that the IPCC has zero labs. If a party believes they have this vast collection of Labs, show us the photos with accurate descriptions.
My aim is not to debunk climate change.

I almost with regularity when I post show examples of proven climate change.
Where?
Where glaciers melt.
Where glaciers remain.
I add in Death Valley. Why is that? Because it is known as the hottest of all time places on Earth.
So I present science.
When was their hottest all time day?
Well it was in 1913.
So what was the CO2 measurement at that time?

Well it turns out it was 301 ppm.
Today it is over 410 ppm

Here is a scientific graph
https://www.sealevel.info/co2_and_ch4.html

So the question is why on earth was it hotter at 301 ppm than at 410 ppm?
Death Valley is cooler today than in 1913.
That makes no sense at all if the problem on Earth is man created Carbon Dioxide.

Before any posters declare it was merely one point on Earth, let me point out that if they are correct, we should be a huge number hotter and proven than in 1913. That extreme heat should easily show up in Death Valley. it is the best point on Earth to show extremes of heat.

Death valley reports cite on particular days. This season it hit 130 degrees on July 9.

However in 1913 the highest number was 134 degrees

So the canary in the mine hit the peak not now, but 108 years back. Back when the Auto was hardly available.
This is science.
But it does not prove that more CO2 means hotter earth.

 

The above is classic attacks.

Do not present better science, simply dirty up the other guy.
Tell us he is crazy or nuts. But never present up to date proof you are correct.

Today I brought back the canary in the mine.
The canary shows it was hotter in 1913 than in 2021

CO2 has increased by a factor of 1/3 more than then.
But it is cooler.
4 degrees cooler.

 

If I am able to talk you out of having freedom, it beats having to use guns to force you to give it up.
Who will be harmed by green energy?
When has any scientist spoke of that?
Politicians refuse to speak of this part of the equation.
Scientists can't measure it because of the too many unknowns.
One might forgive politicians on that same score.
But when you force the human race off of liquid fuels, you are changing lives.
Changing lives is the stuff of Politics.
Who will be hurt by green energy.
The less able groups will be harmed.
Those who can afford a motorcycle powered by liquid fuels can't afford the other motorcycles along with their infrastructure support.
So if I can talk you out of freedom, it saves me guns and gunpowder costs.

 

They rip climate realists blogs a lot while treating their own warmist/alarmist blogs like children in love, they make clear they avoid real debate since most of them don't know the topic well and therefore they post a bunch of debate avoiding fallacies and nonsense.

 

even
Lindzen admitted that CO2 did play a role he just argued,wrongly that it was not a major driver

 

And what blogs are we promoting?

 

The source is suspect and you have an author presenting information which has been modified from the source without quantifying the modification

land if you have such groundbreaking information that the global temperature has cooled by that mucky why have you not presented it to the IPCC or better yet get it published

Good Grief! The person who could prove that could write a ticket to sweet money returns for the rest of their lives. Governments freed of the onerous tasks of co2 reduction would laud them. Oil companies would shower them in gold, Coal companies would kiss their feet

 

As Ph.D. Richard Lindzen reports, how the alarmists do it is to shoot first and no matter what they hit, allege that was the target all along.
It is a foolproof way of sounding like you know what you are talking about.

 

Perhaps that is true. But I presented solid science. It was about Death Valley, the canary of the mine.
There are not 97 percent of scientists backing the alarm, which is the part I object to, and even you allege you do not use that, so if there is no alarm, what is the fuss about?

 

And Lindzen is retired - no longer a voice in the field

He is now yesterday’s news

 

They are Desperate Robert, they know less than we do, they even ignore the official Satellite data on declining global wildfires and ignore the fact that it has been COOLING for about 7 years now even with Hadcrut4 and Satellite data as the source.

They have for years ignored numerous published papers showing that CO2 changes FOLLOWS changes to temperature over time.

They have ignored papers showing that the "hot spot" doesn't exist even the Satellite data and Radio Sonde data doesn't show it, they ignore it.

They ignore that even alarmist scientists agree that CO2 alone doesn't generate rapid warming, it needs the Positive feedback loop for that, which still doesn't exist after 30 years of looking.

They are wedded to an ideology, thus unable to change with the evidence as they are "BELIVERS" of an idea drilled into them via propaganda and brainwashing.

They couldn't handle this thread I started objectively:

Where Is The “Climate Emergency”? (LINK)

It is a terrible sight to see so many conned so easily.

 

One spot on the planet

yep! Go for it! Write it up as a paper and get all those rewards or even just use the errata feedback mechanism to the IPCC I am sure I’m they will agree that just two measurements in one spot o the planet disproves global warming. But it seems there are more than a couple of question marks around these turn of the century recordings
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/100244736

 

Lindzen is no longer counted and I believe the hundreds of scientists who are currently working on the IPCC reports. Those are MY premier scientists

 

The key to comprehension is to put to use the mind.
Why Death Valley?

Well for one thing it holds the all time record for hottest ever place on Earth.
It is natural for science to include it as proof it is either hotter or cooler.
Since 1913 though still blazing hot, the top temperature is still obtained there.
You have not proved the entire earth has warmed.
Even if it is a bit warmer, we are only warmer by 2 degrees.
Try this experiment.

Set your home temperature 2 more degrees warmer and get back to us when you need protection.

 

Those you approve get paid a lot to make their claims public.

 

Where did he say that?

 

You cited a city as your proof of global climate change. Funny you do not want to use an entire hot valley.

 

There is money in it for the alarmists.

 

I did? When? Where?

 

See how disingenuous you have to be? Yes, CO2 plays a role; it has to, by the basic physics of radiative heat transfer. CO2 "plays a role" even if ECS is 0.01C. That is the sort of obvious, indisputable, uncontroversial and innocuous fact of science the 97% consensus actually agrees on, but which the disingenuous anti-fossil-fuel screamers falsely claim is agreement that any more CO2 will roast us all alive.

His argument was completely valid.

 

He has NEVER seen the "heat" budget, that shows how small CO2 warm forcing is.

 

PAGES2019 is the disease. Steve McIntyre is the cure.
PAGES2019: 30-60S
Aug 26, 2021 – 2:24 PM
The 30-60N latitude band gets lots of attention in paleoclimate collections – probably more proxies than the rest of the world combined. The 30-60S latitude band is exactly the same size, but it is little studied. It is the world of the Roaring Forties and Furious Fifties, a world that is almost entirely ocean. The only land is New Zealand, Tasmania and the southern coast of Australia facing Antarctica, the tip of South Africa and the narrow part of South America: southern Chile and Argentina. But 96% or so is ocean. . . .
Given that the 60-30S latband is almost entirely ocean, it seems logical that IPCC and PAGES2K should use data from ocean proxies to estimate past temperature in this latitude band. But this isn’t what they’ve done. Instead, they’ve purported to estimate past temperature from a few scattered tree ring chronologies, only one of which reaches earlier than AD1850; and an idiosyncratic singleton pigment series. Ironically, the only 30-60S proxy series in PAGES 2019 that reaches back into the first millennium – the Mount Read, Tasmania tree ring series – was used by Mann et al 1998-1999, Jones et al 1998 and numerous other supposedly “independent” multiproxy studies. Neither of the two series reaching back to the medieval period permit the conclusion that modern period is warmer than medieval period. Caveat: I’m not saying that it isn’t; only that this data doesn’t show it, let alone support the big-bladed HS cited by IPCC. High-resolution alkenone measurements from ocean cores offshore Chile show a consistent decrease in ocean temperatures over the past two millennia that is neither reported nor discussed by IPCC (or PAGES 2019). . . .