From their FAQ section:
It really is a good resource about the methodologies (and faults therein) of climate studies, interesting aberrations that must be accounted for, and resulting alternate data and conclusions that must be considered; it's a refreshing alternative to listening to all of the regurgitated abstracts in the news media and bullshit spewing from politicians and political machines, both locally and abroad. (on both sides of the issue)
Are you saying the 15th century was warmer than the present?
No, we are saying that the hockey stick graph used by IPCC provides no statistically significant information about how the current climate compares to that of the 15th century (and earlier). And notwithstanding that, to the extent readers consider the results informative, if a correct PC method and the unedited version of the Gasp series are used, the graph used by the IPCC to measure the average temperature of the Northern Hemisphere shows values in the 15th century exceed those at the end of the 20th century.Does your work disprove global warming?
We have not made such a claim. There is considerable evidence that in many locations the late 20th century was generally warmer than the mid-19th century. However, there is also considerable evidence that in parts of the Northern Hemisphere, the mid-19th century was exceptionally cold. We think that a more interesting issue is whether the late 20th century was warmer than periods of similar length in the 11th century. We ourselves do not opine on this matter, other than to say that the MBH results relied upon so heavily by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in its 2001 report are invalid.
(Plus the douchebags at realclimate.org who tend to base their assumptions on emotion and fear REALLY hate them. So that naturally makes me like them more.)
Edited by Jase, 06 December 2008 - 12:32 PM.