i posted this some time ago but it was pulled because of spamming but in light of the mention of the hockey stick i thought id repost ....................................................................... for a couple of the many critiques of the ipcc summary go to
and these comments from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldeconaf/12/5020102.htm
"Q158Lord Lawson of Blaby: This Committee is very anxious, because this is such a difficult and important issue and so much of it is in dispute, to maximise the area of agreement. With that in view, may I read to you something that Professor Lindzen of MIT, who was one of our witnesses last week, said: "The disagreement is not over whether temperature has been changing. Almost everyone agrees somewhere around the order of a half degree change over the last century." That is agreed, is it?
Dr Pachauri: 0.6 degrees is what we estimate.
Q159Lord Lawson of Blaby: Is there an agreement over how much of that 0.6 degrees was in the first half of the century and how much in the second and, if so, can you tell us?
Dr Pachauri: The bulk of it took place in the second half of the century. The third assessment clearly brought out the finding that the bulk of the increase took place in the last 50 years."
all this angst over .6 degrees? its a bloody sham
a further discourse on the sham is in this document
another discussion is found here http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/11/05/warm-refs.pdf;jsessionid=KCG4FGKGRSNMTQFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0
the previous link came from a newpaper article (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/05/nosplit/nwarm05.xml&DCMP=EMC-new_05112006) containing the following graph. the article states that the hockey stick graph was widely used by the un and the canadian govt sent it to every household. it was later proved to be false as the model they fed the data into almost always drew hockey sticks even if they fed random electronic red noise. -
