More questions about Global Warming
In a BBC interview Phil Jones claimed the “trick” he was referring to in the hacked e-mail was “a convenient way of … joining the earlier valid part of tree ring data with the recent, more reliable instrumental record.” He admits that recent tree ring data does not agree with actual temperature . The tree rings actually indicate cooler temperatures than the instruments do. He insists that the wild ass guesses he and others made based on earlier tree ring growths remain valid. If recent data does not agree how much assurance do we have that guesses based on the same methodology have any validity? Read the interview yourself. It is full of these self-serving revelations. The interview can be found at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm.
He agreed that two periods in recent times had experienced similar warming. And he agreed that the debate had not been settled over whether the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than the current period. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511701.stm
Looks like even Jones is admitting the books have been cooked while continuing to be th High Priest of Global Warming.
