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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (845059)	3/25/2015 3:15:56 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572915

The Lysenkoists have devoted a lot of effort at propping up that propaganda study. Problem is we know the MWP and LIA existed and were worldwide phenomenon's..... thus the whole premise of the modeled hockey sticks fails.

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (845059)	9/4/2015 12:47:05 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572915

"There are only two problems with the proxy reconstructions. The proxies, and the reconstructions." - Mary Steyn If you were willing to hear the facts I'd gladly present them. Almost every one of these studies was shot down by M&M, just as were the original MBH papers -- often because they used the same bogus proxy series or methodology. There are only so many ways you can reconstruct the proxies. But if you base it on bristlecones (as a number of these did) you cannot fix that; the behaviors are nonlinear and any "adjustment" becomes so speculative it is going to distort findings. This is the problem with the list you cited: Most of them make the same sorts of errors, although I think only one or two papers relied on the flawed MBH models. The reason MBH created the flawed code was to try to marginalize the MWP while inflating recent temperatures. That is the same objective as the rest of the "Hockey Team" has. That they use different ways of going about it is without consequence.