Sentences with phrase «paleoclimatology does»

I agree, only been at this about a year and paleoclimatology does cover the universe Blogs have been helpful getting started but I've bought a subscription to science and have been trying to learn from original literature for the past six months or so.

I agree, only been at this about a year and paleoclimatology does cover the universe Blogs have been helpful getting started but I've bought a subscription to science and have been trying to learn from original literature for the past six months or so.

Not exact matches

For example, I am patiently waiting for someone at the Guardian to address the serious misrepresentations of Oxburgh and Muir Russell made by Steve McIntyre at last week's panel discussions in the U.K. (Not to mention McIntyre's characterization of paleoclimatology as little more than «phrenology» or his inability to answer a simple question about attribution of current warming — and don't get me started on Fred Pearce).

Almost all of the authors here at Realclimate have done substantial work in paleoclimate for decades, as you can see from our publication lists (including the textbook Paleoclimatology).

Do we know from from paleoclimatology, that we can have a climate state, in which there is * no * summer ice in the North pole, while the South pole «is ok»?

I don't see the point of asking Lindzen about practices within paleoclimatology.

I don't have enough familiarity with estimates of climate sensitivity derived from paleoclimatology to venture an opinion.

Sure, your historical documents (h / t Galaxy Quest) show some other incidents that can be loosely correlated with the CET; however, we have no idea of the historical documents you do not include that might hide the decline in correlation, and broader paleoclimatology efforts — the most inclusive to date being Marcott et al, no?

Don't get your paleoclimatology from Watts.

[DC: But the apparent plagiarism, and numerous errors introduced, also demonstrate clearly that Wegman et al did not understand the background material on paleoclimatology and social networks, thus undermining the credibility of the entire report.

I don't think that talking about the last 100 years would be considered as paleoclimatology.

If you google «Paleoclimatology: Reconstructing Climates of the Quarternary» you do get a few citations, though many more when it is spelled Quaternary.

Today we'll take a closer look at Wegman et al's key passage on tree - ring proxies and do a detailed side - by - side comparison with its apparent main antecedent, chapter section 10.2 in Raymond Bradley's classic Paleoclimatology: Reconstructing Climates of the Quaternary.

I don't know my paleoclimatology.

What paleoclimatology had to do with the issue I raised that you responded to you never made clear.

It has been shown that you do not understand the literature on climate sensitivity, historical paleo - temperature reconstructions, and many others and none of this has stopped you from declaring the IPCC 2001 and beyond «hockey stick» graphic a lie, misrepresenting Dr. Pinker, misrepresenting the science of deep - time paleoclimatology (notably the reference to the Ordovician), and many others.