(May 11, 2011 at 12:34 am)ib.me.ub Wrote: The "Milankovitch Hypothesis" has neither been properly evaluted or verified. I would say it is a good source for skeptics to lean towards.
Actually, Milankovich cycle predicts climactic condition over the last million years, as determined from Antarctic ice core samples, extremely well. The theory also predicts we should currently be in the first half of a period of downward trending global temperature. Milankovich cycle thus suggest agent(s) whose strength was not notable during much of last million years being responsible for the observed global temperature rise. Anthropogenic GHG, not present in strength except during last few hundred years, certainly seem like a worthy candidate.
As to whether the theory can be used for support by skeptics, it does not seem that way. But so what if it could? How a theory might be used is not a measure of the merit and validity of the theory. Rather, if a sound theory can be used to support a position not to one's liking, it is reason to adjust one's liking, not reason to dismiss the theory.
