web analytics


By ATWadmin On November 30th, 2009

I saw this over on the All Seeing Eye’s excellent site and thought all you budding climatologists might want to take the quiz…

7 Responses to “FANCY A QUIZ?”

  1. 1.22 above:

    "The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only 7 years of data and it isn’t statistically significant."

    – Phil Jones, 5th July 2005

    True, seven years is statistically insignificant, but the world has been cooling since 1998. Isn’t that so, Climate Cooling Deniers?

    Have we been right about that? Or have we – and the great Phil Jones – been wrong about that?

    If the great Phil Jones is wrong about the last decade, what does it say about his ability to predict the next century?

  2. it’s a religion and just like any religion faith in your belief over rides facts, except this religion wants us to spend trillions of dollars and destroy the advancement of mankind to satisfy their priests

  3. True, seven years is statistically insignificant, but the world has been cooling since 1998. Isn’t that so, Climate Cooling Deniers?

    Once again this lie is repeated. I’m not going to bother posting the link to Nasa temperature data which shows it up as a lie, because it’s clearly a waste of time.

  4. Peter – you must be one heck of a climate scientist because Dr Kevin Trenberth (one of your heroes) wrote….

    Dr Kevin Trenberth of the US Center for Atmospheric Research complains in one of the emails that modelling of sea surface temperatures “shows there should be even more warming”.

    “We can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment”, Trenberth laments, “and it is a travesty that we can’t”.

    The observed data, he surmises, “are surely wrong”, and the observing system, he maintains, is inadequate.


    So your right and he’s wrong. OK and is that your provable fact or just an assertion? Cos assertions are not really the same as facts.

    Can you point to the real unadjusted pre Dr Jones ‘trick’ data to prove us and Dr Trenberth wrong? cos otherwise I’m gonna have to call you on this one.

    Dr Jones (another one of your heroes) wrote…

    Dr Phil Jones about the use he made of work by a colleague, Dr Michael Mann of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University.

    “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”

    So what decline is he hiding Peter? The number of rice Krispies he had for brekkie? Or is he making the temperature data fit his theories?

    I suggest that in the absence of the raw data (and the CRU intentionally destroyed it) that you refrain from repeating your obvious canards. You cannot expect anyone to rely on the discredited evidence from ANY of the snake oil scientists prensently in situ until ALL the raw data has been published and analysed by reputable experts independently and they all independently concur.
    Until that happens it’s a religion not science.

  5. Ethan

    I posted that the climate has not been cooling for 10 years. If you know different, please post a link yo back your claim. Otherwise …

  6. Why not ask Dr Trenberth what cooling he was referring to or Dr Jones what decline he felt the need to hide? Just google ‘climategate’ conspiracy, fake data, global cooling.

    But here you go (google found 18.6m items).




    Now prove to me that your citing raw unadjusted data. The kind that Dr Jones deleted and encouraged others to do the same? See I don’t buy it. I think that these fools created such an atmosphere of fear that they influenced / scientists world wide. Not so much peer review as peer pressure!

    Oh and how come Dr Mann’s hockey stick is based on just one tree core from the hundreds available?

    try googling yamal scandal. google only found 12,700 of those but you’ll get the idea from this one.
    or this one

    The hottest tree in the world.


    Gotta love that one!

    Seems to me that the Alarmists will need a new religion soon. How about Oprahism?

  7. This is worth a read Peter.


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.