/sci/ - Science & Math

>>2927894

You're going to have to show either a source or an sourced argument explaining why the "hockey stick" type reconstructions are spurious

I don't really see where you could get this impression, unless you learned all your science from political blogs

Here is a collection of about a dozen hockey sticks, only one of with is from the MBH team that "skeptics" love to rail against

>>1635885

>about to plunge the temperature of this planet once more.

>about to

Moar like, extend the interglacial a few extra hundred thousand years

>>1223610

Thanks dude.

In the meantime I'll link my old package which I used to post.

http://www.mediafire.com/?m3yewzevxow

Sup /sci/

I'm a political science and history major, but recently I've been looking into the scientific literature on global warming. I can't understand shit except the abstracts and discussion sections. So I was thinking that I should go back to the basics, re-learn my high school math through Khan Academy and the textbooks I have lying around, and work my way up from there.

Where should I go from there if I want to teach myself enough to understand scientific articles? Is it even possible to teach myself enough to understand a multidisciplinary field like climatology?