Mikki Mannin puulustot

Tämä vaatii ehdottomastti ......!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAlMomLvu_4

Kyhäelmä vaikutti jonkun 12-vuotiaan tekeleeltä, syvä tietämättömyys yhdistyneenä murrosiän uhoon...

Eipä muuta kommentia tuostakaan kaivattane.

Mitäs köyhä poika oikein yrittää. Sehän oli täyttä asiaa.

"Seeing the anti-gaia perspective, there is no way we can support the present perspective"

Sähköteurastaja puhuu taas täyttä asiaa.

Although we and many others have many bones to pick with many aspects of
Mann and Jones' analysis, we will here focus on just a couple of points
and temporarily grant them the benefit of the doubt in those other areas.
First of all, granting them almost everything they have done, it can
readily be seen from their own graph of their own results that the end
point of their reconstructed global mean temperature history is not the
warmest period of the prior 1800 years. In fact, their treatment of the
data depicts three earlier warmer periods: one just prior to AD 700, one
just after AD 700 and one just prior to AD 1000 (see figure below).
Reconstructed global temperature anomaly (based on 1961-1990
instrumental reference period) adapted from Mann and Jones (2003).
The globe only becomes warmer in the 20th century when its measured
temperatures are substituted for its reconstructed temperatures. This
approach is clearly unacceptable; it is like comparing apples and
oranges. If one has only reconstructed temperatures from the distant
past, one can only validly compare them with reconstructed temperatures
from the recent past.