The hockey stick is wrong and result of bad science.

How the hockey stick was destroyed by Professor Ross McKitrick and Professor of Applied Mathematics Christopher Essex.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Global
• warming
• hockey
• stick
• false
• Ross
• McKitrick
• Christopher
• Essex

[Albertkallal]

@practicepants How is my stance ridiculous when you are the one making an act of faith here? You not have done this science so you must accept on faith the witness and others who bear this testimony for you. As for being wrong about what? Farms in the MWP experienced warmer temps than today. In past history every time it's been warmer it been much better for man and I see no reason to think that such warming is not positive again today like it was back in the MWP.

[Albertkallal]

@practicepants Why can't you offer any reason as to why in the MWP farms in Greenland were productive back then and today spend most of their year in permafrost and in unproductive state? You now going to claim Greenland is Europe? As noted recent archeological studies of farms from the MWP in Greenland state for those farms to be productive today would require a climate as much as 4 degrees warmer than today! It could not be man's co2, so what made it so warm back then?

[practicepants]

@Albertkallal Because if you had any real understanding of the science about this whole subject, you would realise how ridiculous your stance is.

You've made it clear your views are based on politics, not science. Ask yourself, what if you're wrong??

[practicepants]

@Albertkallal You haven't said anything except "it might be the sun". I'm not watching 30 propaganda videos, when there is an enormous body of science freely available. You demonstrate your complete lack of understanding of scientific approach.

[Albertkallal]

@practicepants In that study, it does.

[Albertkallal]

@practicepants The reason why these trust issues are important is because you not done the experiments and are not a witness to these experiments. You are thus asking based on your act of faith for me to accept the witness and testimony of others. Why accept YOUR act of faith of those who bear witness to these things when they been shown not be trusted and they refuse to correct their errors? Why should I accept your act of faith on this matter?

[Albertkallal]

@practicepants As for avoiding what I think is driving temperatures? I already stated several times as to what I think some factors are and you have 30+ videos of mine to view on this matter. I also stated what I think does not really matter since I am not the one running around stating that man's co2 is driving temperatures as these scammers claim when they don't have the math or science to back up their positions and worse they don't care about correcting their errors anyway.

[practicepants]

@Albertkallal Again, how do you explain that solar activity does not correlate with temp rise over the last hundred years?

[practicepants]

@Albertkallal No, you have no understanding of the huge body of science that supports AGW theory - and that is made obvious by the fact that you cannot offer any alternative solutions to the question of "why".

[Albertkallal]

@practicepants As I pointed out the study does I fact find a relation to solar activity, but it is an inverse one. In fact you confirmed the results of that study when you opened your mouth and pointed out to me that solar activity been declining during a period in which temperature been rising. So the words coming out of your mouth in fact agree with this study don't they?