Quote:
Originally Posted by Arragonis
...what about reconstructions.
Reconstructions come from many source "proxies". Basically you find something which is captured and stored over time - ice cores, tree rings, lake sediments, even coral remains were used a few years ago.
The problem with these is that you get (at best) maybe a seasonal measurement, or an annual one, or maybe less than that.
|
And so? Point here is that the reconstructions, taken all together, are the best information we have. That information - from many different and unrelated sources - is pretty much all giving us the same picture, and that picture matches what is predicted from physics and observed CO2 increases.
What you seem to be saying is that we should just ignore all the reconstructions (and the physics) because you don't like the conclusions people draw from them. This is apparently because you (along with a lot of other like-minded folks lumped under that term you so dislike) have the (utterly mistaken, IMHO) belief that the contemporary western lifestyle represents the best of all possible worlds, so anything that threatens to upset the status quo must be silenced.