Quote:
Originally posted by Bingo+May 12 2005, 01:46 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bingo @ May 12 2005, 01:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by Flames89@May 12 2005, 01:17 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Mike F
|
Quote:
@May 12 2005, 03:54 PM
From that I'd say that the questions about Mann's work don't blow up the support for climate change the way the article implies.
|
That is what I was trying to say.
This journalist, who is obviously anti-Kyoto, is using the one study's lack of verification to discount the whole global warming theory all together.
|
I think one assume's the writer is anti-Kyoto because he's saying something you may not want to hear.
As a stand alone it certainly holds water as a news story in my mind. And even more so given the Canadian roots to some of the scientists. The hockey stick graph from Mann is certainly the center point of a lot of Kyoto talk, regardless of how many sources they actually have.
If that data is wrong, it's certainly worth looking at, don't you think? [/b][/quote]
It may be a news story, but the reporter's conclusion that the hockey stick was splintered, which is what most people are focusing on, is questionable at best.
Even if there are questions about Mann's data, there appear to be other independent studies which found the same thing. The fact that the reporter ignored that indicates that either he/she is anti-Kyoto and had an agenda, or didn't bother to do any research. Neither options lends much credibility to the article.