Mann's case, the rising temperature of the medieval Warm Period and the expected trough of the little Ice Age had been completely erased. . The hockey stick was broken. . we may never know whether Mann's work was deliberately contrived to fit some personal environmental agenda, or just a colossal mathematical blunder. McIntyre submitted his work to nature magazine - since they were responsible for publishing Mann's flawed research without peer review in the first place, but they reportedly rejected it, saying it was "too long". . he then shortened it to 500 words, and re-submitted it, but again it was rejected, this time saying it was "too mathematical" or words to that effect. . heaven forbid any publication calling itself an "International weekly journal of Science" from actually publishing any science that hinged on mathematics. . Let's all push a yard stick into the snow, measure the snow depth, call ourselves "climate scientists and get published in Nature. . In the end, McIntyre turned to the internet and its true freedom of the press, and today he is known to every serious climate scientist on the planet as the man who broke the hockey stick.
Buy essays Online, write my essay for me, essay
This chart, unfortunately, became the foundation for the first report of the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change ( ipcc which in turn provided the summary information and recommendations to the world's governments. . The summary Anthropogenic Global Warming panic was off to a rocketing start. However, some folks noticed a couple of significant and fairly well accepted climatological history facts to be conspicuously missing. . The first was the well-documented "Medieval Warm Period" where temperatures, at least in Europe as mentioned in our introduction, were significantly higher. . The second was the "Little Ice Age a period in which the temperatures dropped so low the Thames river in London froze over. How could this be an accurate record of the last millennium? Let's pause and mention that the data above is not "raw" data. . Mann actually used about 70-80 data sets, and in each set he applied a mathematical analysis known as a principle component analysis ( pca ) which seeks to extract principal, or significant component information from a widely varying set of raw data. Along comes Steve mcIntyre, a canadian analyst, who spends two years of his own personal time reverse-engineering. McIntyre subjects Mann's pca program to a "Monte carlo" analysis - which inserts random data sets into the function - and discovered that no business matter what data he fed it, the result was always the same. . The arm of the "hockey stick" ( paleo-record ) always came out straight. .
The vertical scale is in degrees Centigrade, and note carefully that it is graded in increments of 1/10 of a degree. . That means the wiggly blue section in the middle is actually only varying up and down by about a half of a degree. . The baseline, as noted, is set at the average of the recorded temperatures from 1961 to 1990. . Also student note that only the red portion represents actual measured temperatures - the rest is based on the assumption that one can interpret past temperatures from examining ancient tree rings or ice core samples from centuries-old ice locked in glaciers. . This is, at best, a marriage of apples and oranges - the handle being somewhat of an educated guess, and the blade being based on actual measurements using thermometric recording devices. . Sort of like pairing the skull of a human with the jawbone of an orangutan. . And finally, note that the chart is for the northern hemisphere only. .
He's called "Anthropogenic Global Warming it's hard to nail down exactly when the sky started falling, but certainly the work. Michael Mann provided its first global exposure. . Michael Mann, a paleoclimatologist ( one who attempts to interpret the past climate through certain Paleolithic records, such as ice core samples, sea bed sediments, coral heads, and tree ring growth submitted a paper to nature magazine in 1998 which, unfortunately, was not subjected. In it, he offered what has now become known as the famous "hockey stick" chart, showing the earth's temperature having been relatively constant story for the past thousand years before suddenly skyrocketing upward at the dawn of the 20th century. . His interpretation was that man's production of CO2 in the modern age was obviously responsible for the sudden increase. . It turned out to be one of the biggest scientific blunders of all time. Look carefully at the chart above, which is the famous "hockey stick" chart. . Note the horizontal scale is in years, stretching from the year 1000 to the near present time. .
we have tried to present work from what we believe to be credible, thoroughly diligent scientists actively engaged in current research. . Let's get started: we're reminded of an earlier story, which happened back in 1912. This was the amazing discovery of a skull and jawbone in which was quickly named the. Piltdown Man and which all the world's archaeologists immediately accepted as a hitherto unknown form of early human. It appears no one bothered to examine it closely, assuming that other scientists had thoroughly investigated and vetted. The hoax wasn't uncovered until 1953, when it was learned that the skull was that of a modern man and the jaw that of an orangutan. Seems no one had ever bothered to take a really close look at the artifact. Well, folks, it does appear we have a new, 21st Century piltdown Man, and this time we know his name.
Global, warming — so now What?
Is it any wonder that the most popular majors in college are liberal arts? Snipped from an article entitled, solar-Cycle warming at long the earths Surface and an Observational Determination of Climate sensitivity. By ka-kit Tung and Charles. Department of Applied Mathematics, university of Washington, seattle washington, let's take a short glance at the equation at the left, because you're never going to see anything like it again in this editorial. . to most of you, it is gobbly-gook, but to a physicist, it is part of a mathematical proof accompanying a particular study done on the sun's role in Global Warming. .
What the authors are explaining is they have life found that the total solar irradiance (TSI) has been measured by orbiting satellites since 1978 and it varies on an 11-year cycle by about.07. . so, from solar min to solar max, the tsi reaching the earths surface increases at a rate comparable to the radiative heating due to a 1 per year increase in greenhouse gases, and will probably add, during the next five to six years in the. Don't fret - neither Al Gore nor any of the popular journalists can understand it either. We'll try to reference most of the material, but if we miss a credit, or use a photograph someone didn't want to share with the world (ok, we wonder why the photo was on the web if that were the case) we'll quickly remove. And let's freely admit up front that what we offer here is a dissenting opinion, and surely we have "cherry-picked" the articles of others which are also contrary to the widely held current beliefs. . A bit of this is original on our part, but most of it comes from others around the globe. .
The final signature was from the. President of the world Federation of Scientists. At last, we were not alone. We decided to publish the results of our counter-exploration on the internet - but in a somewhat uniquely different fashion. . Knowing that most folks aren't geeks, and may have little understanding of science or math, we're going to attempt to teach some of the essential physics and such as we go along. . readers with little or no mathematical or scientific training may find it challenging, but if you have a general understanding of introductory college or even solid high school level chemistry or physics, you should have no problem in following this amazing tale. .
The brighter readers, even without a science background, should be able to follow, as well. . Smart folks learn faster than most. What follows is a tale gleaned from many sources over what turned out to be an unreasonably long period of time. . we'll be first examining a "worst case" scenario, using very simple math at first, in order to arrive in a ballpark that will tell us if we need to go further and pull out long strings of complicated equations, which we don't want to have. This is a valid scientific method despite its apparent simplicity, for if one can first determine that a person does not own a motorcycle, then you don't have to spend a lot of time calculating how likely he is to crash while riding. . Reducing it to the simplest of terms for the average person to understand was a daunting task. . Below is an example of what "real" Climate Scientists have to deal with on a daily basis. .
How to stop global warming, in 7 steps - vox
we humans aren't all shaped by the same cookie cutter, and that's a blessing that has taken us as a species to the top of thesis the food chain. But by then we had been sharing our own independent research of the literature with others via email, and receiving a surprising amount of agreement back in return. (We're in contact with a large number of fellow scientists around the country, dating back to our college days in the 17th century when beer was a quarter a bottle). . One local friend, in particular, kept pressing us to publish, and even offered to set up a "debate" with the popular journalist who had usurped our original article. . This we politely declined, arguing that "debate" cannot prove or disprove ience must stand on its own. But then something unusual happened. 13, 2007, 100 scientists jointly signed an, open Letter to ban ki-moon, secretary-general of the United Nations, requesting they cease the man-made global warming hysteria and settle down to helping mankind better prepare for natural disasters. .
Still, the individual had published a degenerative number of popular books on popular environmental issues, was well-loved by those of similar political bent, and was held in high esteem among his peers. . we had learned a valuable lesson: Popular journalists trump coupled sets of 2nd-order partial differential equations every time. . Serious science doesn't matter if you have the press in your pocket. In fairness to the Addison Independent and its editors, our article was somewhat lengthy and technical, and presumably the average reader most likely could not follow or even be interested in an alternative viewpoint, since everyone knew by now that the global warming issue was. And we confess that we like the paper, subscribe to it, and know a number of folks who work there personally. . They're all good folks, and they have every right to choose what does or doesn't go in their publication. . They also have a right to spin the news any direction they choose, because that's what freedom of the press is all about. . seems everyone, both left and right, does it - and it's almost certain we will be accused of doing the same here. . And we just may be, as hard as we may try to avoid. .
matter and its many exceptionally complex interactions allowed us to research and understand the foundations of many other sciences. . In short, we read complex scientific articles in many other scientific disciplines with relative ease and good understanding - like most folks read comic books. As our own knowledge of "climate science" grew, so grew our doubts over the "settled science". . What we found was the science was far from "settled". In fact it was barely underway. It was for a while a somewhat lonely quest, what with "all the world's scientists" apparently having no doubt. . Finally, in December 2007 we submitted an article to one of our local newspapers, the. Addison Independent, thinking they would be delighted in having at minimum an alternative view of the issue. . Alas, they chose not to publish it, but two weeks after our submission (by the strangest coincidence published yet another "pro-global-warming" feature written by an individual whom, to the best we could determine, had no advanced training in any science at all, beyond self-taught.
Historians ponder how the entire nation of Germany could possibly have goose-stepped into place in such a short time, and we have similar unrest. . have we become a nation of overnight loonies? Sorry folks, but we're not exactly buying into the Global Hysteria just yet. We know a great deal about atmospheric physics, (bio) and from the onset, many of the claims were just plain fishy. . The extreme haste with which seemingly the entire world immediately accepted the idea of Anthropogenic ( moliere man-made ) Global Warming made us more than a little bit suspicious that no one had really taken a close look at the science. . we also knew that the catch-all activity today known as "Climate Science" was in its infancy, and that atmospheric modeling did not and still does not exist which can predict changes in the weather or climate more than about a day or two in advance. So the endless stream of dire predictions of what was going to happen years or decades from now if we did not drastically reduce our CO2 production by virtually shutting down the economies of the world appeared to be more the product of radical political.
Essay on, nature custom Essays, term
Editor's Introductory story note : Our planet has been slowly warming since last emerging from the "Little Ice Age" of the 17th century, often associated with the. Before that came the ". Medieval Warm Period in which temperatures were about the same as they are today. . Both of these climate phenomena are known to have occurred in the northern Hemisphere, but several hundred years prior to the present, the majority of the southern Hemisphere was primarily populated by indigenous peoples, where science and scientific observation was limited to non-existent. . Thus we can not say that these periods were necessarily "global". However, "Global Warming" in recent historical times has been an undisputable fact, and no one can reasonably deny that. But we're hearing far too often that the "science" is "settled and that it is mankind's contribution to the natural CO2 in the atmosphere has been the principal cause of an increasing "Greenhouse Effect which is the root "cause" of global warming. . we're also hearing that "all the world's scientists now agree on this settled science and it is now time to quickly and most radically alter our culture, and prevent a looming global catastrophe. . And last, but not least, we're seeing a sort of mass hysteria sweeping our culture which is really quite disturbing. .