<?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#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: How to lie with graphs.  Looking at YOU, Sen Inhofe	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/01/26/medieval-warm-period-is-a-hoax/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/01/26/medieval-warm-period-is-a-hoax/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2015 13:54:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.8</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Greg Laden		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/01/26/medieval-warm-period-is-a-hoax/#comment-216855</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Greg Laden]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2015 13:54:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://gregladen.com/blog/?p=8041#comment-216855</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Discredited may be the wrong word, you are right, in this context.  It has been overturned, or more exactly, the concept has been updated.  

Discredited applies more to the current use of the old, overturned idea, by US Senators!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Discredited may be the wrong word, you are right, in this context.  It has been overturned, or more exactly, the concept has been updated.  </p>
<p>Discredited applies more to the current use of the old, overturned idea, by US Senators!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: John Mashey		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2015/01/26/medieval-warm-period-is-a-hoax/#comment-216599</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John Mashey]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2015 04:12:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://gregladen.com/blog/?p=8041#comment-216599</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thanks!
Note, it&#039;s not so much that it has been discredited, it was the best there was in 1965, estimated by a fine scientist to cover 21x34-mil path of England, using the best data he could get.  Some people might want to think England is the world, but it isn&#039;t, and Lamb was clear about that.

I&#039;d say that it was an approximation to reality, that rapidly got replaced by a sequence of better approximations as people really geared up in the 1990s.  TO some extent, it highlighted how little was then known
The improvements form a great science detective story, as people got more and more clever at teasing out signal from noise in challenging data records they have no time machines for. They ahve to work with the data they can get, not what they&#039;d like to have.

Inhofe is not a scientist, although he apparently seems to think an anonymous Opinion article in the Wall Street Journal is authoritative enough to show the Senate. :-)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks!<br />
Note, it&#8217;s not so much that it has been discredited, it was the best there was in 1965, estimated by a fine scientist to cover 21&#215;34-mil path of England, using the best data he could get.  Some people might want to think England is the world, but it isn&#8217;t, and Lamb was clear about that.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d say that it was an approximation to reality, that rapidly got replaced by a sequence of better approximations as people really geared up in the 1990s.  TO some extent, it highlighted how little was then known<br />
The improvements form a great science detective story, as people got more and more clever at teasing out signal from noise in challenging data records they have no time machines for. They ahve to work with the data they can get, not what they&#8217;d like to have.</p>
<p>Inhofe is not a scientist, although he apparently seems to think an anonymous Opinion article in the Wall Street Journal is authoritative enough to show the Senate. 🙂</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
