Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,906 Year: 4,163/9,624 Month: 1,034/974 Week: 361/286 Day: 4/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Climategate Email Quotes on Dendrochronology, Ice Cores, and Coral Dating
Admin
Director
Posts: 13044
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 3 of 7 (672470)
09-08-2012 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Jzyehoshua
09-08-2012 2:17 PM


I have to confess that I understood almost none of this, but maybe all will become clear with a little background. Let's take it one little step at a time.
What are "evolutionary multiproxy dating methods"? Google comes up dry.
--Percy

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Jzyehoshua, posted 09-08-2012 2:17 PM Jzyehoshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Jzyehoshua, posted 09-09-2012 11:00 AM Admin has replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 13044
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 5 of 7 (672545)
09-09-2012 11:15 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Jzyehoshua
09-09-2012 11:00 AM


So the topic you'd like to discuss is problems with dating methods as revealed by the Climategate emails, and how these dating methods no longer provide support for evolutionary timescales? If so, could you fix your opening post to make that more clear. And if not, then sorry, but could you explain your topic again?

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Jzyehoshua, posted 09-09-2012 11:00 AM Jzyehoshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Jzyehoshua, posted 09-09-2012 11:44 AM Admin has replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 13044
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 7 of 7 (672562)
09-09-2012 1:20 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Jzyehoshua
09-09-2012 11:44 AM


Yes, much clearer, very nice.
Now please help me understand what point you're making with this:
"[Met Office/Hadley's Simon Tett] 1) Didn't see a justification for use of tree-rings and not using ice cores -- the obvious one is that ice cores are no good -- see Jones et al, 1998. 2) No justification for regional reconstructions rather than what Mann et al did (I don't think we can say we didn't do Mann et al because we think it is crap!)"
Tom Nelson: ClimateGate scientists on Michael Mann and his work: "probable flaws" and "clearly deficient", and "crap" and "way too defensive", oh my!
Is it the "ice cores are no good" that is the key portion? Or the part about Mann? Both? In any case, is it your interpretation that the author is saying ice core dating is no good? And anyone without intimate knowledge of climategate isn't going to know what part Mann played, so you need to fill in the details. Sorry to string this out on you, but there's just not enough context yet. I just spent 15 minutes reading about Mann so I could figure out what point you were trying to make, and I'm still not sure.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Jzyehoshua, posted 09-09-2012 11:44 AM Jzyehoshua has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024