Thread: Global Warming
View Single Post
Old 08-30-2011, 07:51 AM   #14
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,319
Send a message via MSN to unownmew
Originally Posted by Tyranidos View Post
Cool outdated information bro.

It may seem like a natural trend and that the Medieval Period was hotter than it is now, but who knows if we've peaked yet? This suggests that the arctic circle hadn't been touched the natural warming and cooling trends until about 1900 i.e. the onset of the Industrial Revolution.
I fail to see how sunspot records, proof of a hoaxed graph (which is still a base for many global warming accounts), and proof of a corruptible peer review system can be counted as "outdated" information.

Even if temperatures haven't peaked, we're still no where close to the temperatures of the medieval warming period. As well, it's proof that Humankind did not contribute to the warm temperatures in that period, so what evidence is there to say that we are actually contributing to this warming?

Instead of simply saying, "no, that's outdated, things have changed since then," and "Who knows what the future may bring?" how about you counter me with some actual information and real studies?

Also, your article fails to provide any source material for it's claims, which is automatically discrediting. If the study exists, why would it not cite it then? Are we not supposed to study their "conclusive" evidence for ourselves? I'd like to see this study they claim has irrefutable proof of manmade global warming, perhaps you could find it for me?

Edit: Here we go, I found the Article I was looking for. All 91 pages of it.
The Wegman Report, an analysis of Mann et al's Hockey Stick graph and his close association with his Peer Reviewers. (It's a PDF file)
When you look at it, you'll see there's plenty of places where Scholastic Dishonesty is likely to have occurred. Whether you believe it did or not, the possibility can not be ruled out.
And yet, Mann is still a very prominent Global Warming activist, with a high position in the UN. If he faked one thing, why is he allowed to preside over the crisis that was originally brought up from his faked work?

Last edited by unownmew; 08-30-2011 at 08:51 AM.
unownmew is offline   Reply With Quote