quote:
You did not provide any links that go straight to data or photos, just general sites. That's not good enough. The burden of finding where the data is is not on me. I am not going to research where it is, and if it requires a FOIA then it is practically inaccessable. I want to know where the full research report for the 8000 year tree ring chronology is and the full research report for the 800,000 antarctic core. I want all the chemical analaysis, all the O-18, all the wiggle matches. A straight link to all the research notes, a brief on the philosophical positions of each researcher.
Then we have to look at modeling assumptions, paleo climate assumptions.
And even then, bad science may be involved. We must reasonable rule out a hoax.
But, I'll consider it good faith if you can just give me the direct link to the 8000 tree ring chronology. I don't think you CAN provide a link to anything as simple as all the sample codes and list of tree ring widths with 14C dates and lab reports for each piece. Either the whole thing will do, or the part that goes from 4000 b.p. back to 8000 b.p.
A number of scientific papers relating to radiocarbon calibration (matching radiocarbon ot tree rings, varves, speleothems, etc) are here:
http://radiocarbon.library.arizona.edu/Volume46/Number3/
The paper starting at page 1029 provides a good overview. The one starting at p. 1093 details the statistical methods that are used. The one starting at p. 1111 gives some details of tree rings back to ~12,000 years.
But I'm sure this will not satisfy you. You don't seem to understand how science is done. Scientists rarely (if ever) publish the "raw data" that you are demanding to see. It is ridiculous to ask for "all the research notes" or "a brief on the philosophical positions of each researcher."
Publishing all of the raw data would be unworkable; a three page paper would expand to 300 pages and no one could sort through it. If another researcher is suspicious of some part of the analysis he may contact the authors directly and ask specific questions (not "show me all of your raw data", but specific questions about the procedures used). More commonly, a suspicious scientist will repeat everything himself; he will gather his own data and do his own measurements and analysis.