Home › News ›

Report Affirms Earth Temperature 'Hockey Stick' Graph

Posted by: Abhijeet Chavan

23 June 2006 - 2:00pm

A report requested by the U.S. Congress validates the theory that the earth has grown hotter in the last century.

"The 'hockey stick' diagram, which shows a sharp upturn in temperatures in recent decades, has been a prime target for groups who doubt humans are warming the planet...They argued it had been massaged to produce the distinctive shape...

The fall-out culminated in one US politician demanding to see financial and research records from the three scientists who had put the data together: Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley, and Malcolm Hughes (sometimes referred to simply as MBH).

The new report, carried out by a panel of the US-based National Research Council (NRC), largely vindicates the researchers' work, first published in 1998. "

Full Story: Backing for 'hockey stick' graph
Source: BBC News, June 23, 2006
»

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Much Ado About Nothing

Submitted by misterconcrete on Fri, 06/23/2006 - 19:29.

Climate change is so huge, complex and incomprehensible, this "debate" is worthless. There may be an as-yet unknown corrective mechanism that will rebalance temps or even trigger an ice age. Besides, stop denying that there are real benefits to global warming. Ever notice how most of the earth's landmass is at useless northern latitudes?

With simple technologies that exist now, these latitudes could be settled and what we are really facing is a severe underpopulation of humans. Canada alone could easily handle 800 million people. The US could handle 1.5 billion. Picture your bungalow on the shores of Hudson Bay with your glass-enclosed greenhouse producing Mizuna lettuce and your fish pond producing shrimp.

As far as sea-level rise - I hereby call for the construction of thousands of nuclear power plants to pump and desalinate seawater and to flood the deserts of the world thereby lowering sea level and vastly expanding agricultural capacity and carbon sequestration.

Also the al-Qattabh(sp?) project in Egypt must move forward. This could remove thousands of square kilometers of water from the seas and produce immense amounts of electricity, agriculture and industry.

How about some real planning for a change instead of all these deer in the headlights. This profession is pathetic.

Backfilling

Submitted by Robert Cote on Fri, 06/23/2006 - 14:18.

The "Hockey Stick" has destryed the credibility of the AGW crowd. It is no surprise that there would be an attempt to rehabilitate the concept. Same thing happened with ocean surface temperature sattelite measurements. Proponents tried and tried until the data could be adjusted until it matched their conclusions.

Landfilling your argument

Submitted by Dano on Fri, 06/23/2006 - 15:15.

The "Hockey Stick" has destroyed the credibility of the AGW crowd.

Please.

The report stated:

"It can be said with a high level of confidence that global mean surface temperature was higher during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period during the preceding four centuries. This statement is justified by the consistency of the
evidence from a wide variety of geographically diverse proxies.

Less confidence can be placed in large-scale surface temperature reconstructions for the period from A.D. 900 to 1600. Presently available proxy evidence indicates that temperatures at many, but not all, individual locations were higher during the past 25 years than during any period of comparable length since A.D. 900. The uncertainties associated with reconstructing hemispheric mean or global mean temperatures from these data increase substantially backward in time through this period and are not yet fully quantified." (pp 2-3)

Tell us again Robert how this supports your evidenceless assertion.

And your satellite temps, BTW, after UAH finally released their data to others, got audited and were found to be incorrectly analyzed.

Sounds like you are having trouble reconciling evidence to your ideology, Robt. Pity that.

Best,

D

Bookmark and Share
“
All of that only scratches the surface of what's wrong with this study. The idea that complex urban development patterns and human behavior can be meaningfully studied according to one primary criteria — density — is wrong from the start.
”