John Carter

Yep, you're right Matt - it's a bit pointless.

But...

Cole Sear: I see stupid people.
Malcolm Crowe: On the TV comedy shows?
[Cole shakes his head no]
Malcolm Crowe: In real life?
[Cole nods]
Malcolm Crowe: Stupid people like, in Labour? In the Lib Dems?
Cole Sear: Walking around like regular people. They don't see each other. They only see what they want to see. They don't know they're stupid.
Malcolm Crowe: How often do you see them?
Cole Sear: All the time. They're everywhere.

...and it's kind of depressing. Sheeple to the slaughter, etc., etc..

Besoeker

Clippo
Thank you for your kind words.
Two points.
1. I try to be factual on everything.
2. I try to avoid personal abuse.

Besoeker

I'm not a voodooist. And my IQ does't classify me as an idiot.
Thus, by your standards, I am not qualified to respond to your post.
So I will just respond on the basis of my standards. Objectivity.
The graph you posted covers three thousand years.
It ends quite a long way short of present day.
Recent rates of temperature change are orders of magnitude greater than shown on your data,

mkpdavies

Quantify that please.

__________________
http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/
http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/
http://lpuk.org

My ignore list

Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

John Carter

The hockey stick you keep banging on about covers 1,000 years.

And the data presented therein doesn't exactly match up with the real data.

Until 1975. Are you telling me that we didn't have industrialisation until 1975?

I'll tell ya what's happening here. You're looking at incredibly small periods of time which suit your pre-defined position (as noted by your observation that 1975 is a "long way short" of the present day). Your hockey stick guy and all the other scientists on your side are doing the same: they're fitting the data to match their pre-defined position.

A bit like how Labour used an anomalous year on which to base their speed cameras/road deaths statistics.

Now, as far as I'm concerned any scientist who does this isn't a scientist at all - they're a politician.

spaman

The problem is that blair and co have already made the decision - the wheels are already in motion - government departmernts have been aligned to tax anything that moves and tell us its all about GW

...it will take more our few words of disagreement to stop this monstrosity - it's in the genes now......no doubt gone down as far as DNA in some susceptible sub-species

Besoeker

3.6

brian pearson

John. How was this meaured all those years ago ? I have used the graph in an argument could do with a simple anwer, if there is one. Thanks

Besoeker

I do wish you would stick to facts.

A. I have not once mentioned anything about a hockey stick, far less kept banging on about it.
B. It follows from A that I have not commented on the data therein.
C. No, I am not telling you and have never told you that we didn't have industrialisation until 1975.
D. You don't know what my predefined position is. You just assumed it. As did Clippo, incidently.
E. It follows from D that you don't which other scientists are on my side.

I'll tell you what. Next time I reply to one of your posts, I'll leave mine blank. Then you can just fill it in with what you think I said. That'll be no different to what you seem to do anyway, and it'll save me some time and effort.

Have a nice day, Sunshine.
:wink:

John Carter

Measuring isotope ratios and carbon dating organisms in sea bed sediment, as far as I can tell.