"Roger Chapman" wrote in message
...
On 04/12/2011 21:09, dennis@home wrote:

Tree ring data has no part to play in modelling climate when actual
temperature records are available.

But they are fine to develop data sets that are used to model ancient
records when no direct measurement was available.. even though they
can't do the same for records when direct measurements are available.

You just don't understand do you.

I understand better than you.
I can see that if they don't understand why the measured temps disagree with
the ring data there is no reason to assume the temps based on ring data
where there is no direct measurement are correct.
Its quite simple, even you should be able to understand that.

Lets try and explain it very slowly for you...

say a ring grows 1 mm in 2009. You measure the temp and get say 5C.
Then you find a ring in 1920 and its 1 mm but the temp is say 3C.
So now you go to 1700 and find a ring that is 1mm and say the temp must have
been 3C.
You have ignored the 2009 figure because your faulty assumptions say it
can't be true even though they (the 1930 and the 2009 figures) are both
measured and verifiable.
You ignore it because it means 1700 may have been warmer than you want it to
have been and throw away the data that doesn't agree with what you want, not
because you have proven the data to be invalid.