/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8591480

>>8588356
I'm smart enough to see when people create mumbo jumbo every few years to explain their failed models.
Studying Climate science. So who exactly will be paying you for your "skill" once you graduate? Soros? Clinton Foundation? Government in general? Carbon taxes?
Curious...

>>8583382
>>8583376
I'm an actual climate /sci/ here, focusing on ice cores. These data doesn't seem right, what are the sources? Which cores and proxy are they basing their T reconstruction from? The lack of error bars and the unusually high resolution of said T reconstruction should be the trigger there.

For example, pic related is a commonly circulated misleading figure. Why? Because the original citation

http://klimarealistene.com/web-content/Bibliografi/Alley2000%20The%20Younger%20Dryas%20cold%20interval%20as%20viewed%20from%20central%20Greenland%20QSR.pdf

has nothing to do with <2000 yr T reconstruction, if you see the actual paper it was talking about the younger dryas climate even 12ka ago. The reason the authors doesn't address the <2000 yr T reconstruction is because it was just mathematical noise, because said T reconstruction is based on bootstrapping water isotopes (which has a lot of variability) onto a T curve so it's only good on longer timescale