Is it only being rooted out in 2008? There have been a bunch of different proxy reconstructions over the years—are you saying that this 2008 paper was the first one to avoid that methodological problem? Do you know the climate literature well enough to be making these kinds of statements?
You don’t understand why I’m suspicious that a fundamental problem with their methodology, widely used as proof, is only being rooted out in 2008?
Be glad it’s happening at all.
Is it only being rooted out in 2008? There have been a bunch of different proxy reconstructions over the years—are you saying that this 2008 paper was the first one to avoid that methodological problem? Do you know the climate literature well enough to be making these kinds of statements?