Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (12727)	5/20/2007 6:20:43 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 36917

Like Piltdown Man

To: LindyBill who wrote (12727)	5/20/2007 7:02:33 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36917

I don't know of any reputable refutation of Mann's graph. Do you? More to the point however, why don't you see if any of the anti-global warming crowd can produce a model and compare it to Hansen's 1988 model over the last couple of decades and achieve better results? This model will of course need to match Hansen's model given the same inputs, then show that continued warming during the next century does not happen, given continued CO2 increases. I.e. a similar simulation run (same inputs) matches Hansen's output for the observed historical time we now have, yet diverges from Hansen's model going forward. This is the put up or shut up challenge for anti-global warming fans. The problem is, none of them actually want to produce anything. Why try real science when armchair bitching is so much easier? If in fact any such model could be produced, and survived reasonable peer review, anti-global warming theories would be taken seriously. Unfortunately, no such model exists, hence climate modelers don't take them seriously.