Quote from: Spendulus on April 14, 2015, 03:17:53 AM

Quote from: hofor on April 13, 2015, 10:30:48 PM

Another video on the hockey stick by a science journalist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CY4Yecsx_-s

To sum up: The hockey stick is real. Anyone who denies that is denying science itself.

False.

Multiple lines of evidence and malfeasance show the "hockey stick" to be false.

Hmm... thousands of scientists and scientific papers, or someone on a forum... who do we believe?

Are you one of the people who prefer to visit the carpenter instead of the doctor when you get sick?

Quote from: Spendulus on April 14, 2015, 03:23:32 AM

Quote from: hofor on April 13, 2015, 08:07:07 AM

This is not true. The measurements show that more of the excess energy is going into the oceans. But the atmosphere is still warming as well, although it's warming at a slower rate at the moment (again, due to where the energy is going).

Remember that climate is about the trend over time. Cherry-picking shorter periods of time is not an honest way to go about things. Even if the temperature does have periods of variation (the measured temperature has gone down for shorter periods in the past), the overall trend is still up. It's disingenuous to pretend that the science says that the surface temperature will only ever increase. The science actually does point to periods of fluctuations up and down.

You need to look at the trend.

Cherry picking? Don't make me laugh. It was cherry picking that caused the problem, namely looking at disappearing ice caps and such with only three decades of satellite data. Now we have two decades of data showing no statistically significant warming, and that, my friend, means it is totally correct to say "no warming in 20 years."

I'm not sure what ice caps you are referring to. I'm guessing you'll never explain it either.

As for the rest of the quote, I don't think you understand what "statistically significant" means. You may be referring to Phil Jones' comment that the warming trend since 1995 wasn't statistically significant at the time he was asked a question by a journalist. Of course, opponents of science claimed that he said there was no warming. But he never said that. He said that there was warming, but the time period since 1995 was just too short to give it statistical significance.

By the way, I linked to a graph that shows that there has been a warming trend since 1995. Why did you ignore that?

Quote

Please don't lecture about fluctations and put words in others' mouths that the did not say or imply. It is the secular trend behind the fluctuations which is being discussed, not the fact that winter is cold and summer is hot. It is the basic trendline as established with a calculation of the climate sensitivity factor. And when we compute that with 20 years of no warming, we do in fact find a far, far lower climate sensitivity to co2 than Climate Alarmists have been shrilling crying doom over.

I'm afraid you are severaly misguided. There has been warming in the past 20 years, but at the same time more of the energy has gone into the oceans.