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: Land Shark who wrote (33615)	6/11/2011 9:57:57 PM
From: Brumar89	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36921

Thats not what 'hide the decline' means, dumbass. They were hiding the predictions of temperature made from tree rings because they weren't showing what they wanted the graph to show for recent decades. The tree ring data predicting lower temperatures for recent decades ought to have called into question their entire study. "The final aspect of tree-ring studies that needs to be highlighted is what has become known as the 'divergence' issue. This refers to the apparent failure of some (established as temperature-responsive) tree-ring data to follow the trend in instrumental temperatures observed over the latter part of the twentieth century. .... The IPCC recently laid particular stress on this issue, pointing out that any significant shift in the recent growth response of trees would invalidate the assumptions that underlie the simple regression-based approach to reconstructing past temperature changes. This would imply an inability to recognize potential underestimates of the degree of warmth in earlier periods of reconstructions (Jansen et al., 2007)." That's from Jones/Briffa themselves. windsofchange.net What they did was highly unethical and you should be ashamed of defending the deception.