Climate Change -- for real?
A really interesting write-up on weather the climate change predictions
are real. We have repeated the notion so many times that they have
become facts without anybody questioning what data we really have to
substantiate -- that is until now and some really interesting "truth"
come to light as how data bias and selective objectivity have played a
role in the "facts" we know.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/29/yamal_scandal/
http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=7168 The red graph is the "official facts" showing a temperature increase
since the mid 1800 -- but as it turns out it is based on 12 tree core
samples handpicked from a larger dataset available. The black graph is
the data produced from including more data which from specifications
should be just a good as the handpicked 12 samples.
trusted when they are funded based on what sensational news they can
produce. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/16/briffa_yamal_mailbag/
The links are worth reading -- and if nothing else it is probably clear
now that more research is needed, so awarding more work and funding to
those who failed to produce complete facts in the first place. I assume that this is not a hoax of some kind, however I would have
assume this to be somewhat newsworthy to a larger extend that what have
been evident so far (obscure blogs, nothing mainstream) -- well maybe
CNN will pick it up in a few years and present it as "news".
