<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Briffa Collation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/</link>
	<description>by Steve McIntyre</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 05:25:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Strata-Sphere &#187; More CRU &#8220;Fun With Numbers&#8220;</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/#comment-319193</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The Strata-Sphere &#187; More CRU &#8220;Fun With Numbers&#8220;]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2011 05:06:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=536#comment-319193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] database (CRUTEM1) . They are computed for the regions shown below in a Briffa/CRU diagram (H/T Steve McIntyre). The legend of the diagram is also from McIntyre&#8217;s blog [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] database (CRUTEM1) . They are computed for the regions shown below in a Briffa/CRU diagram (H/T Steve McIntyre). The legend of the diagram is also from McIntyre&#8217;s blog [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Sadlov</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/#comment-44117</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve Sadlov]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2006 01:29:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=536#comment-44117</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[RE: #17 - cricket chirping (rates) would make a really nice additional proxy.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RE: #17 &#8211; cricket chirping (rates) would make a really nice additional proxy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kim</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/#comment-44116</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[kim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2006 01:18:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=536#comment-44116</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Chinese may have records of crickets chirping.
===================================================]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Chinese may have records of crickets chirping.<br />
===================================================</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Sadlov</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/#comment-44115</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve Sadlov]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2006 01:07:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=536#comment-44115</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[RE: #15. It might be productive to look at cultivation patterns of the Aztecs. In their northermost / highest elevation lands, I would expect that in a global MWP scenario, they would have lost the ability to grow warm weather crops. In Asia, one would want to look at pre-Yuan China to see if there were crop failures in the north and to see if in areas south of Shanghai, citrus and, further south, tropicals, had failures. Connect the dots ....]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RE: #15. It might be productive to look at cultivation patterns of the Aztecs. In their northermost / highest elevation lands, I would expect that in a global MWP scenario, they would have lost the ability to grow warm weather crops. In Asia, one would want to look at pre-Yuan China to see if there were crop failures in the north and to see if in areas south of Shanghai, citrus and, further south, tropicals, had failures. Connect the dots &#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jae</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/#comment-44114</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jae]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:53:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=536#comment-44114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As I recall, the Anasazi culture disappeared some time in the 1200&#039;s, and the Mayan culture declined about the same time.  Both declines have been blamed by some on drought.  This might be related to the MWP.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I recall, the Anasazi culture disappeared some time in the 1200&#8242;s, and the Mayan culture declined about the same time.  Both declines have been blamed by some on drought.  This might be related to the MWP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Sadlov</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/#comment-44113</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve Sadlov]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:11:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=536#comment-44113</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Posted today in the queue for the &quot;New Take On An Old Millenneum&quot; thread at RC. If they actually post it, I anxiously await the discusion, if any. Could be deafening silence. We&#039;ll see:

Setting aside for a moment any debate regarding proxies such as tree rings and formanifera, from the standpoint of cultural / archeological indicators (as well as historical accounts of things such as life ways, clothing, food and drink and the like) what are the things that tend to confirm and refute a global MWP of substantial degree (that term is somewhat loaded, but by &quot;substantial&quot; I mean things that have impacts similar to things thought to accompany the theorized coming warm up). For example, in Europe, people wore substantially thinner and less layered clothing during the MWP timeframe, versus what they wore during the Rennaissance, Enlightenment, Neo-Classical and Industrial Revolution time frames. That indicates the shift from the warm peak to the cold valley. Cathedrals were thought to be attractants to worship because they gave respite from the heat (even though some of them were not completed in time to reap the most benefit, we must look at the times of their initial conception / early project planning.) Take as another indicator the cultivation of citrus. Etc. What, if any, similar observations and anecdotal evidence are there in the Americas, Africa, Australia and Asia? I have not studied this and welcome what folks have to say in these regards.
by Steve Sadlov]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Posted today in the queue for the &#8220;New Take On An Old Millenneum&#8221; thread at RC. If they actually post it, I anxiously await the discusion, if any. Could be deafening silence. We&#8217;ll see:</p>
<p>Setting aside for a moment any debate regarding proxies such as tree rings and formanifera, from the standpoint of cultural / archeological indicators (as well as historical accounts of things such as life ways, clothing, food and drink and the like) what are the things that tend to confirm and refute a global MWP of substantial degree (that term is somewhat loaded, but by &#8220;substantial&#8221; I mean things that have impacts similar to things thought to accompany the theorized coming warm up). For example, in Europe, people wore substantially thinner and less layered clothing during the MWP timeframe, versus what they wore during the Rennaissance, Enlightenment, Neo-Classical and Industrial Revolution time frames. That indicates the shift from the warm peak to the cold valley. Cathedrals were thought to be attractants to worship because they gave respite from the heat (even though some of them were not completed in time to reap the most benefit, we must look at the times of their initial conception / early project planning.) Take as another indicator the cultivation of citrus. Etc. What, if any, similar observations and anecdotal evidence are there in the Americas, Africa, Australia and Asia? I have not studied this and welcome what folks have to say in these regards.<br />
by Steve Sadlov</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jae</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/#comment-44112</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jae]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:15:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=536#comment-44112</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Maybe the buisness end hockey stick is correct! Check this study out: http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V7/N2/C1.jsp]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe the buisness end hockey stick is correct! Check this study out: <a href="http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V7/N2/C1.jsp" rel="nofollow">http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V7/N2/C1.jsp</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Sadlov</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/#comment-44111</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Steve Sadlov]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 2006 15:46:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=536#comment-44111</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First graph is through about 1991 or 1992 whereas the second is through 1995. The most precipitous drop in latewood density appears to have been between 1992 and 1994 according to the second graph, with a barely discernable recovery after that.

Somewhat off topic, did anyone catch the History Channel yesterday evening regarding the Roanoke Colony? They were doing tree ring studies of swamp cyprus, and were using ring widths as a proxy - for moisture.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First graph is through about 1991 or 1992 whereas the second is through 1995. The most precipitous drop in latewood density appears to have been between 1992 and 1994 according to the second graph, with a barely discernable recovery after that.</p>
<p>Somewhat off topic, did anyone catch the History Channel yesterday evening regarding the Roanoke Colony? They were doing tree ring studies of swamp cyprus, and were using ring widths as a proxy &#8211; for moisture.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jae</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/#comment-44110</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jae]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2006 20:23:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=536#comment-44110</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Maybe I&#039;m missing something here, but it looks to me like many of these figures show that the trees are not responding to temperature the way these guys claim, despite picking only those trees which are not negatively correlated with temperature.  I don&#039;t see the hockey stick, except in the spagetti graphs.  Did the hockeystick just magically appear one day?  And, hey, if the data after 1960 don&#039;t support your hypothesis, you don&#039;t use it.  That way your hypothesis has to be correct.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe I&#8217;m missing something here, but it looks to me like many of these figures show that the trees are not responding to temperature the way these guys claim, despite picking only those trees which are not negatively correlated with temperature.  I don&#8217;t see the hockey stick, except in the spagetti graphs.  Did the hockeystick just magically appear one day?  And, hey, if the data after 1960 don&#8217;t support your hypothesis, you don&#8217;t use it.  That way your hypothesis has to be correct.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pat Frank</title>
		<link>http://climateaudit.org/2006/02/19/536/#comment-44109</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pat Frank]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2006 20:02:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=536#comment-44109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Steve, there&#039;s more going on in the first two plots than that the end of the density line is lower. I&#039;ve not read all the comments here yet, and so don&#039;t know if this&#039;s been mentioned, but the density minimum around 1979 represents about -1.1 degree in 1998 but about -0.7 degree in 2004 (reading off my screen here).

In 1998 the maximum density represents about +1.1 degree in 1945, but represents +0.4 degree at 1939 in 2004.  Likewise the maximum temperature in 1990 is about +2 degrees in 1998, but only about +0.5 degree in 2004.

There seems to be either a lot of renormalizing going on, or else the modest increase in number of sites (314 to 387) has radically transformed the data set.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve, there&#8217;s more going on in the first two plots than that the end of the density line is lower. I&#8217;ve not read all the comments here yet, and so don&#8217;t know if this&#8217;s been mentioned, but the density minimum around 1979 represents about -1.1 degree in 1998 but about -0.7 degree in 2004 (reading off my screen here).</p>
<p>In 1998 the maximum density represents about +1.1 degree in 1945, but represents +0.4 degree at 1939 in 2004.  Likewise the maximum temperature in 1990 is about +2 degrees in 1998, but only about +0.5 degree in 2004.</p>
<p>There seems to be either a lot of renormalizing going on, or else the modest increase in number of sites (314 to 387) has radically transformed the data set.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
