Can global warming deniers answer a simple question?

First of all Wahl and Ammann is not "independent" study. They are Mann's recent co-authors and Ammann was a PhD student under Mann and Bradley. Their article simply fleshes out points that Mann himself had already made in his correspondence with Nature - although Mann is nowhere mentioned in the acknowledgements - presumably in an attempt to make the study seem "independent" - a claim that Wegman rejected sarcastically.

But since you are an expert on statistical analysis, here is a rebutall by McIntyre. Now you tell me what is wrong, with his analysis.

http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=798

I then urge you to do a search of Wahl and Ammann on his web site to find out even more criticisms. Now tell me in your own words what is wrong with his analysis. Can you do that? I do not think so. But then again you are not a statistician. But you are going around around asking us for rebuttals to Wahl, knowing full well that non of us are qualified to answer your question. Since no one can, you will then dance around and declare victory and say that the case is closed. Very very typical alarmist tactic.

Why do they have the same shape. Also from the Wegman report:

“It is clear that many of the proxies are re-used in most of the papers. It is not surprising that the papers would obtain similar results and so cannot really claim to be independent verifications.”

Loehle, used non tree rings proxies and came up with a different conclusion, even in his revised edition.

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2008/0...

But I forgot. Mann's PHD student addressed the tree ring data issue and found them to be legitimate. So they must be right.

So far it seems that all the proxy data says that average temperatures during the Medieval Warm Period didn't reach worldwide average temperature today.

This is pretty much in line with the summary for the book 'The Medieval Warm Period' (which collected together research papers etc). Other papers support this, but they say that these warm periods weren't always going on at the same time. Eg it might have been warm in Europe for 30 years, but only warm in China 50 years after that, say.

Eg Hughes & Diaz (Climatic Change, 2005): 'These warmer regional episodes were not strongly synchronous.' similar to Hughes & Lowery (AMBIO, 2000).

Ottawa Mike: there are nearly 400 vineyards in England, going as far north as Lancashire & Yorkshire:

http://www.yell.com/s/wine+producers+and+vineyards...

A Kentish Vineyard started in 1991. I assume they based their economic decision on the temperature of the years before; ie the late 1980s, when temperatures in England were (on average) about 0.5+C cooler than they have been for the 2000s.

Corky, does past climate change (regional or otherwise) mean rapid holocene warming must be natural and desirable in today's human-dominated world?

Peter:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008...

(this is a comment on an RC article, not from one of their nasty "biased" climatologists).

Mike: There have also been vineyards in England for the entire 20th century through today. And please tell me, what were the Vikings growing, where in Greenland, what was their productivity like, and how does that translate to global average temperature? Please provide a SCIENTIFIC source.

But all the little anecdotes (which often turn out to be falsehoods or partial-truths) aside, is any denier going to actually answer the topic question?

Ampat, maybe you should have a closer look at the petition project:

http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/denier-vs-skeptic/d...

http://timlambert.org/2004/05/oregonpetition/

http://chriscolose.wordpress.com/2008/05/22/one-mo...

I am going back to a few months ago when you and your other alarmists stated that indeed the Mann "hockey stick" was incorrect and you had reasons for it then why Mann was incorrect in his assumptions and why were the deniers keep bringing it up. Instead of wasting my time trying to find that discourse why don't you or one of your people locate it for us to answer your own question.

I believe Ottawa Mike's answer answered your question which was by the way just another rant as you already concluded months ago that it was false. So do you really have this much time on your hands to spew this propaganda to the people on this site?

I'm not a denier so I won't answer the question. I will just say though, that i am pleased there is still someone out there pushing the petition project. What a goose.

I would be more interested if a warmer could go through this paper and tell me how warm it must have been for the Vikings to have navigated the Artic both east and west for more than 200 years sending back home charts that Columbus used to make his southern route journey after he found the documented northern route was closed by ice.

http://www.spirasolaris.ca/1aintro.html

Oh yes the hockey stick, anybody that has ever taken world history at any grade only needs to take a quick look at it to know it is completely phony. In fact the publication of the hockey stick graph was probably the matchstick that turned most previous fence sitter into full blown skeptics. It has absolutely no relevance at all to the history of the worlds weather and climate.

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm

By the way, why do these guys keep using statistics to wipe out clear anecdotal evidence of warmer times in the MWP? I'd be much more impressed if somebody could go and grow the same crops the Vikings did in the same spot on Greenland or start a vineyard in England.

LOL. Not suprising that the first answer went off-topic and answered your question...with a question XD(Corky)

Not only that but climate change before man-kind? I have no idea what he's talking about.

A simple question is simple -- can you ask one?

The answer is because the new hockey stick is wrong. When the arctic is passable by small wooden boats, as it has been in human history.. then I'll think the earth is "warm" by historical standards.

When are you going to pay the money you owe for getting your sea-ice prediction wrong?

Edit...

References to "Realclimate" are rejected out of hand here (because it's a biased load of crap.)

Perhaps you should ask one of these 30,000 scientists, or better yet, one of the over 9000 PhD's on this petition.