I’m not arguing at all. Are you?
So we aren’t currently seeing warming? Or are we?
I have no idea what you’re getting at here since I never said someone measured the temperature with a thermometer 10,000 years ago. Obviously that’s impossible.
This just seems like some weird vendetta.
Why does that matter anyway?
I’ve addressed it multiple times. I don’t know what is wrong with you.
I really don’t see how this is my problem. I was asked if the data exists. I showed where it exists. What more do you want from me?
The data. According to the page that is accessible without membership in their club, the site you linked to does not contain data, it contains a proxy approximation of what they think the data would show if it existed. In other words, it’s a computer simulation based on speculation of what they think the temperatures may have been.
You mean like satellite measurements of temperature?
No, like temperatures not taken with an instrument of any kind. Proxy temperatures … estimates of which are calculated from isotopes found in sediments and/or gasses trapped in ice, for example. And your source presumably did not even contain that data, it only contained a computer simulation of the estimated temperatures over the time frame they claimed them to represent based on that proxy data.
Maybe the problem here is that you don’t know the meaning of the word data.
Satellites don’t measure the temperature. They measure microwave radiation. It’s a proxy.
Just like they may measure isotopes, size of tree rings or other proxies.
These are all different types of data.
Data: facts and statistics collected together for reference or analysis.
Samm,
You need to stop here. The literature of which you (and others) speak of is enormous. None of us here can access, much less interpret, the research. If you can do that for me, you would be doing me a big favor.
Amadeus
Uhh, proxy temperature is still data. You not agreeing with it being accurate (which you don’t actually provide any reasons for it’s innacuracy) does not discount it as being data.
Microwave proxy temperatures measured from satellites are ground truthed in real time. They are absolutely nothing like isotope proxy temperatures obtained from ancient sediments and gas bubbles trapped in ice cores.
Besides, there were no satellites measuring any temperature by microwave or any other method prior to 1975. They have zero bearing on anything to do with temperature recreations going back 11,000 years, which is what we were discussing.
I appreciate your attempt at peacemaking, but if you have been following the conversation you should be able to see that I’m not the one here who needs to stop.
That is correct, but the site dantes linked does not show the data or even what the proxies were or where they came from or how the computer entry data was generated. What it shows is the computer generated recreation of temperature vs. time using that proxy data.
As compared to what? It’s an inter-glacial period, it’s supposed to warm up.
Is it warmer than we’ve been in previous inter-glacial periods? No, not that anyone can demonstrate.
Why would it matter? Really?
If you can’t compare actual temperatures from all over the globe over a given period in which you’re claiming X amount of warming has occurred your theory is unsupportable.
Neither ice cores nor tree rings nor any of the other proxies we use to reconstruct historical temperature data are reliable enough to say with any certainty that we’ve warmed 3 degrees since industrialization began because they can’t show what the actual temps were prior to industrialization.
This is very simple stuff for anyone that’s actually studied science.
That’s like saying thermometers don’t actually measure temperature they only show how much the media has expanded or contracted.
How much microwave radiation is emitted at a given temperature is understood and is the basis for he satellite temp data.
It’s still a proxy, that’s all.
It’s still data.
Exactly, but that data needs to be interpreted, calibrated, adjusted. Just like proxy data from anything else.
No, unlike the historical proxy data it can be measured in real time and compared against known values and emissions rates.
