Comments JeffId has made

  • Jeff Id

    My point was that he refuted the statistics.  

        Ian Jolliffe, a noted principal components authority, has posted a comment at Tamino's, which repudiates Tamino's (and Mann's) citation of Jolliffe as a supposed authority for Mannian PCA. He wrote to me separately, notifying me of the posting and authorizing me to cross-post his comment and stating that we had correctly understood and described his comments in our response here: :

            [Jolliffe quote]
            I looked at the reference you made to my presentation at http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/MM-W05-backgrou ... after I drafted my contribution and I can see that you actually read the presentation. You have accurately reflected my views there, but I
            guess it's better to have it `from the horse's mouth'.

    I have read his recent comments and detect no change of view.On In 2008, did temperatures drop as much as they rose over the whole 20th century? posted 1 year, 2 months ago 71 Responses

  • The Id's pooint supported by a major statistician

    This is exactly what I was saying repeatedly on this thread.  A major yet unreported development in man made global warming news. Ian Jolliffe, the preeminent statistician on the methods used to make the hockey sticks.  Calls it rubbish.

    http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2008/09/12/global-warmin ...

     On In 2008, did temperatures drop as much as they rose over the whole 20th century? posted 1 year, 2 months ago 71 Responses

  • The evil one

    Hey, Pangolin and others, glad I stopped back to this ancient thread.

    Turanga Leela said

    ..but would all the skeptics in the room please care to explain where all the CO2 in the atmosphere that came from fossil fuels/land conversion/etc is going, if it's not causing warming?

    All the evidence ever gathered has shown that CO2 increases typically lag the data. And by all, i mean really all. From ice cores the 018 to 016 ratios vary indicating (to some) a temperature change.  Lag means CO3 happens after not before temperature change.  It was quite an important issue for skeptics when we noticed al gore shifted the curve for his movie.

    There's pangolin on the bottom.  Still denying,  I have an idea, if the cows are causing global warming maybe we should eat them faster!

    Hey I bet you didn't know how the hockey stick graph above was made!

    http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/ten-things-ev ...On In 2008, did temperatures drop as much as they rose over the whole 20th century? posted 1 year, 2 months ago 71 Responses

  • Incomplete graph

    Why did you cut off the 2008 year in the second graph.

    I bet you dont know how the hockey stick was made!
    http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/ten-things-ev ...On In 2008, did temperatures drop as much as they rose over the whole 20th century? posted 1 year, 2 months ago 71 Responses

  • ice is melting

    Nobody denies the ice is melting.On Earth hotter now than in past 2,000 years posted 1 year, 2 months ago 32 Responses

  • All the confused

    Dave, more investigation is required.  But the science behind the temperature reconstructions is very flawed.  It is easy to see the flaw to, just go to this link and read.

    http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2008/09/04/how-to-make-a ...

    stopgreenpath,

    I know your argument made you feel good but it has little basis in reality.  The big evil energy guys (powering your computer) do have higher than 100 billion in profits (this year) for oil, however they cannot and do not spend all of their profits on global warming research.  They are being outspent by hundreds to one.  So in fact it could be about money.  But it's not.

    Look at it this way if NOW decided from their investigations that women didn't need any more help everyone would have to go home. It ain't likely to happen.

    Pangolin, a bit calmer now I like that.  

    The papers you refer to typically refer to each other and use the same flawed statistically incorrect method I have been trying to tell you about at the link above.On Earth hotter now than in past 2,000 years posted 1 year, 2 months ago 32 Responses

  • No implications here

    David,

    I am not implying anything.  I am stating that a massive multinational government structure was set up to support man made global warming science before any conclusions were reached.  

    If the scientists didn't produce evidence of  man made climate change, the entire organization would have to be dismantled.  Powerful people would be out of work.

    Scientists who disagreed for the last 20 years have been systematically pushed to the bottom of the pile in terms of funding and name recognition.  

    Whats worse is that paleoclimatology data is horribly corrupted with BS statistics analysis and elimination of data which doesn't agree with their conclusions.  The data is naturally noisy (an engineering term) and there is no clear signal in the curves. So they sort it to get rid of the data they don't agree with.

     We cannot draw the conclusion that the past was cooler than now from the results presented at the beginning of this article.  

    To keep it simple: Mann used a statistical method I have only seen in paleoclimatology to throw away data he didn't want.

    It wouldn't be publishable in any other field I know of.On Earth hotter now than in past 2,000 years posted 1 year, 2 months ago 32 Responses

  • Green guys

    Unfortunately, I couldn't log on from my hoe computer last night.  To reply to your uninformed comments.

    David Ahlport copied a bunch of results from studies which use the same process I have attempted to explain to this group.

    And then 1 link to a non study.

    then Tasermons decides that a large government  organization cannot possibly be corrupted expresses that I am of low IQ.

    -David Ahlport comes back with a thought out comment about the IPCC arguing that they don't fund.  

    Dave, I have to thank you for doing an initial look into the funding structure of the IPCC.  It is a bigger situation than you realize.  The IPCC of course states it provides no funding, but the IPCC formed and recommends processes to the UNFCCC which directs funding from the UN GIF to universities, nasa, UN programs and other places based on IPCC and UNFCCC recommendations.

    your statemnt here

    It's assumed that you have a day job as a professor. All the IPCC work, for instance, was all pro-bono.

    Is completely incorrect,  the ipcc funds expenses for travel to reporting scientits, but pays full salaries to the people constructing the reports.  The reporting scientists are funded through the massive government structures based on their indivicual notoriety and fit to AGW needs.

    It is also no small point that the IPCC provides these scientists with a world stage for their research like no other.

    It's big, its ugly and its bad science.On Earth hotter now than in past 2,000 years posted 1 year, 2 months ago 32 Responses

  • EnviroMentalists

    It's not a conspiracy it is a huge money making organization which controls a science completely and happens to require a specific conclusion in order to exist.  

    They were formed well before paleoclimatology had any good data, they need a broken methodology in order to show a temperature history because the data is too noisy to show a real trend.  

    There simply isn't good data on historic temperatures.  

    Let me make it more simple.  

    Mann's group, picks their favorite datasets, calibrate (modify) them to make them fit current temperatures and then throw out more than half the remaining data which doesn't support their hockeystick conclusion and average the rest.  

    Any historic trend is muted toward zero in the process but the most recent temperatures stand out.

    This is how to make a hockey stick!
    I can't say it any more simply than that.On Earth hotter now than in past 2,000 years posted 1 year, 2 months ago 32 Responses

  • A small list of deniers

    I have another link which will point you to a small list of moron scientists who are in denial as you say.

    http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2008/08/29/consensus-a-p ...

    And I disagree about your consensus on peer reviewed science publications.  There are many many such papers which have been peer reviewed.  Unfortunately the UN IPCC which directs about 35 billion dollars to global warming and cannot exist without man made global warming, controls the world stage. These papers are relegated to the back in every case.

    This hundred billion plus dollar industry (when other organizations are included) which would vanish without man made global warming, controls and necissarily corrupts the science.

    I realize you won't be convinced but here is just 1 more link.  

    http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2008/09/01/climate-chang ...

    There is much more information at the environment tab but it is pretty detailed so only the most science oriented should go there.On Earth hotter now than in past 2,000 years posted 1 year, 2 months ago 32 Responses

  • another round

    You are the first commenter/detractor to actually read the graph. I was hoping someone would say this.

    You are right the ice in the arctic has dropped slightly over the only 30 years we have measured, but the antarctic has grown.  30 years of measurement and we're ready to call it quits man is killing the earth! There is no long term trend, only a very short measurement history. In the antarctic ice increases are called a local trend by AGW guys, in the arctic it is global warming (man made of course)

    The temperature reconstruction above and others like it using the same methodology (that is important) is the only link to the true history of temperature.  And the basic mathematics is fairly simple and blatantly flawed. On Earth hotter now than in past 2,000 years posted 1 year, 2 months ago 32 Responses

  • mad guy

    Hey angry guy,

    There are thousands of scholars who disagree with AGW and see the disgrace this science has become. I suggest you study the papers, it is really bad what they are doing.

    I don't understand which part of my post you don't follow.

    By the way the ice increased this summer;)
    http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2008/08/31/arctic-ice-ha ...On Earth hotter now than in past 2,000 years posted 1 year, 2 months ago 32 Responses

  • How this graph was created

    I read the paper and researched the method for creating this graph.  It is clearly nothing more than a method which artificially flattens history favoring a sharp spike in recent times.  I explain how this is done in simple terms with all references at the link below

    http://noconsensus.wordpress.com/2008/09/04/how-to-make-a ...

    Don't believe what you read, this science cannot be trusted.On Earth hotter now than in past 2,000 years posted 1 year, 2 months ago 32 Responses