[David Lawrence] Tree-ring science is an exact science
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My Blog List
-
-
-
Ellen Flees To The UK1 day ago
-
-
-
-
Reconstructing the Esper Reconstruction5 months ago
-
Energy output dented by wind drought5 months ago
-
ビタミンと勃起の関係9 months ago
-
What I’ve Been Up To10 months ago
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
3 comments:
Notice the sig file at the bottom of Lawrence's e-mail. It reads:
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
By using this it seems to me Lawrence is proclaiming his allegiance to a green movement that sees human beings as a plague on the planet - as THE ENEMY.
Yet he thinks his views should carry weight because he is "a member of the National Association of Science Writers as well as a working dendrochronologist..."
Wow.
The David Lawrence part of this email was part of one other email, in which Harold Fritts and Lawrence ripped into Savidge, thinking they'd savaged him. Actually, though, if you read he Lawrence portion here, you will see what they did.
They talked solely about DATING, while Savidge's criticisms were about dendro>temperature correlations. They threw up a straw dog and went ballistic on him - but didn't even dent his point.
I doubt there is a person on the planet who doubts that tree-rings show years, and relative (literally) good summers and bad summers. That is not anyone's argument, especially not Savidge's. Savidge goes around and points out that connecting anything climate to tree-rings is wrong, because no one knows the mechanisms. Fritts, BTW, is called the "father of dendroclimatology," having been the first to tie temps with tree-rings. So he has a vested interest in ALL of global warming.
Steve Garcia
Dendros so far as I know can't tell you anything about winters. It is VERY significant that Ed Cook points out that almost no dendros know a bloody thing about what biologically is going on when tree rings are made. Fritts (
Glad you are on the scent, Tom, Donna, and Steve.
The warmists are especially weak on this topic and have been limping along on media collusion to cover up the weakness for some time.
Take a look at Skeptical Science' page on the divergence problem for example.
Cook says the state of the science is that trees were good thermometers up until 1960. Not so much afterwards. And of course it's man made something or other that broke the treeometers. WTF? It's laughable the stupidity of these clowns.
Point a finger. Take a cue from Prof Savidge and rough em up. Might even be worthwhile to do an exclusive one on one interview with the Professor.
Post a Comment