tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6427940.post112237896064136013..comments2023-12-05T07:50:19.855-05:00Comments on No Oil for Pacifists: Uncorrelated@nooil4pacifistshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16688417615117569825noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6427940.post-1122431515748736612005-07-26T22:31:00.000-04:002005-07-26T22:31:00.000-04:00The article which supposedly lays the blame for gl...The article which supposedly lays the blame for global warming on sunspot activity does no such thing. The article specifically refutes the 1991 graph which MaxedOutMama and others have presented. The recent uptrend in solar activity is ascribed to mathematical errors, and corrected data is shown on other graphs. The article also pointedly takes to task people who continue to publish the old refuted data, and who use it to support their "Global warming isn't due to CO2" arguments.<BR/>I agree with you that most of the global warming bunk we hear is the product of an almost religious belief system. The only scientific cycle proven so far is the positive feedback loop between global warming research funds and results which call for funding further global warming research.<BR/>However, through not reading the article carefully enough, and simply posting the prettiest graph, MaxedOutMama has simply made the same mistake as the global-warmingistas; that of selecting attractive data without regard to veracity.<BR/>We may yet refute the CO2 connection, but this article has MANIFESTLY not done so.<BR/>Go back and read <A HREF="http://www.realclimate.org/damon&laut_2004.pdf" REL="nofollow">the article </A>in detail. You wll be disappointed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com