The story of the defence of the geologically impossible past rivers and oceans of Mars very closely matches the strategies used in the hockey stick war here.

Who won ? And how ?

Also, as we have had a lot of interglacials back in the past three quarters of a million years (see the Dome C and Vostok ice-core data) when temperatures and CO2 levels have been higher than they are now, unless the good folk of Atlantis were very active many times, with long lunch-breaks, and were very meticulous about disposing thoughtfully of all their solid junk, it is perhaps a fair question to ask what is so special about this interglacial, except that it is ours? A slightly longer rear-view vision will I think, help bring a little more clarity. For instance, the Vostok data shows the temperature proxies climbing, and then, some 300 to 3,000 years later, the CO2 climbs or falls in step. In this universe cause is, I think, usually required to precede effect.

As an aside, I do wonder if some of the recent spikes in ice-core data are not there because whatever is being measured in fact dissipates rather rapidly when first buried only just below the surface of the icecap, and then much more slowly as the later snow layers bury that one ever deeper. That could leave several proxies in tatters, at least for the recent past. Like, say, the last thousand years or two.

Do not despair that you are alone in a sea of exceptionally slack science, earth climate folks. The story of the defence of the geologically impossible past rivers and oceans of Mars very closely matches the strategies used in the hockey stick war here. One time series, infinite variables, all either varying directly or inversely to each other. Result, an infinite number of possible Ph.D.s.

In terms of those who have hissy fits, of late, some readings have given me a chance to get more familiar with New Zealand’s Earth Sciences community. Talk about true believers in the Hockey Stick … they might as well be honorary members of the Hockey Team.

There must be something about those islands which fosters the Dr. Smith mentality. “Were DOOOOOOOoOooooooomed!”

Maybe it’s living on top of an 8.0 earthquake waiting to happen …. hmmm…. so do I, and I’m no Dr. Smith. Well so much for that theory …..

I’m sure you know, but for others, the Junkscience site has some extensive climate proxy info/graphs here:

http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Warming_Proxies.htm

One concern might be cherry-picking (can’t tell offhand), but they include some of the HocTeam stuff. I know eyeballing is problematic, but guessing >50% clearly show the MWP & LIA. What else is interesting is that the long-timescale proxies like ice cores often show the highest temps 10000-14000 BP, then w/a slight but consistent downward trend since then (w/a secondary max ~5000 BP). What’s remarkable about that is that the LIA might’ve been the coldest global temps in 10000 or more yrs! That’s never mentioned….

See, we could have a real flame war here if anyone like me could be bothered

Or if we could understand what you are trying to say.

Interesting how none of the criticism of various scientist these posts of ever also seems to refer to these doing the criticising.

?

So there!

See, we could have a real flame war here if anyone like me could be bothered

One of the issues here is that I don’t know what “provisionally accepted” means. There is a common practice, which goes like this:
“We will reconsider your manuscript for publication, providing that you can address the referees comments below:
referees points #1,2,3″

Under these circumstances, you would have to see what the stipulations of the journal were before you could come to a view about what is happening. I am sure we will be rapidly enlightened by the loud trumpeting of success if this paper is finally accepted !
cheers
per

That guy keep turning up. Talk about a Bad penny, but if he’s the one in charge of such things it starts to make much more sense.