Re: Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate!

[Martin Tomasek <tomasek () ufe cz>]

Larry Seltzer wrote:
> PS - If you haven't guessed it already, I think that climate science is
> largely full of crap.

I agree with that.

> Put aside for the minute that the models can't
> explain why we've had *cooling* for the last 10 years; why would you
> think that you can look at ice cores and use them to recreate
> temperatures to within fractions of a degree? You can only prove the
> accuracy of such methods by comparing them with actual temperatures and,
> of course, we can't do that. I've had the sense for a long time that
> these guys know a whole lot less about this stuff than they claim to.
>   

Example: You can match ice cores optically so you will have exact match 
of ice core records. Scientists did dating by carbon radioisotopes in 
matched samples. And radiocarbon dating showed time difference of about 
10000 years. This means samples contain some kind of chemical which is 
incompatible with radiocarbon dating - but they are unable to determine 
which one (afaik).

Another example: There is correllation between temperatures and CO2 
levels. I think it is not significant. But climate scientists split into 
three groups on this: 1 - temperature rise causes rise of CO2 levels. 2 
- rise of CO2 levels cause rise of temperature. 3 - rise of CO2 levels 
cause fall of the temperature. :-)

-- 
Martin Tomasek

"Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." --Benjamin Franklin

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.