it's a good thing your opinions don't matter. The hockey stick graph is confirmed, not discounted. The alleged "discounting" was an invention of denier propaganda.I'm afraid I do need to get spoon-fed. I'm joe public in Ireland not in the US. However, I take your point about the correlation between CO2 emissions and global temperatures.
Is this similar to the famous and now discounted hockey stick graph?
Bear with me on this, people are interested and looking in so you have an audience. Besides, Cassandra has said I can take it off topic.
You didn't bother to fact-check the propaganda, so you believe in something that is false, i.e: the supposed discounting of the hockey stick graph.
Again, lucky for us you aren't in charge. Lucky for us the fate of the world doesn't rest on your judgement.
Is the hockey stick broken?What the science says...
Since the hockey stick paper in 1998, there have been a number of proxy studies analysing a variety of different sources including corals, stalagmites, tree rings, boreholes and ice cores. They all confirm the original hockey stick conclusion: the 20th century is the warmest in the last 1000 years and that warming was most dramatic after 1920.
You may not like the conclusions I'm coming to regarding your judgement, but the fact remains that they are really well-founded. You have two major strikes against you:
You thought that peer-reviewed science ever predicted heatwaves in Ireland, based on no reason at all: FAIL
You thought that the hockey stick conclusion was discounted when in fact it was entirely confirmed: FAIL
Your radar as regards climate science is really, really far off. Can you provide me with any data to convince anyone otherwise. I want to be fair, but I'm not seeing much grounds for giving you any points.