Latest News
Social Security woes could jolt retirees next year
(By – Reuters)
Retirees could receive a double whammy next year: no inflation adjustment in their Social Security benefits and a whopping 52 percent jump in certain Medicare premiums. The Medicare premium hikes will hit only 30 percent of beneficiaries: those who are not protected from a “hold harmless” provision in federal law that prohibits any premium hike that produces a net reduction in Social Security benefits. Read more…
Notice: The “Read more…” link provided above connects readers to the full content of the posted article. The URL (internet address) for this link is valid on the posted date; socialsecurityreport.org cannot guarantee the duration of the link’s validity. Also, the opinions expressed in these postings are the viewpoints of the original source and are not explicitly endorsed by AMAC, Inc.; the AMAC Foundation, Inc.; or socialsecurityreport.org.
Robert, here’s my abbreviated exailnptaon why the use of Tiljander is wrong. The Tiljander study measured sediment thickness which was proposed as a proxy for temperature. Unfortunately, the original authors had showed that the sediments representing the modern thermometer era had gradually morphed into a proxy for human activity: farming, ditching, foresting, bridge building. It had become a proxy of a proxy for temperature and an inverted one at that (thicker varves no longer meant cooler).Mann processed the data using a statistical method which found the bogus correlation in the thermometer calibration period and it produced an inverted temperature reconstruction! Now, if an inverted reconstruction is averaged with a non-inverted reconstruction the cancelling of differences approximates a nice hockey stick handle. And a fuss started when McIntyre and McKitrick tried to point all this out to PNAS.But Man explained, The claim that ‘‘upside down’ data were used is bizarre. Multivariate regression methods are insensitive to the sign of predictors And PNAS apparently agreed.Yet, while Mann’s statement was true, it was not germane. MRA does not fix corrupt datasets. Nor does it interpret a weird (and perhaps desirable) outcome. Most astonishing of all is the absurd opera which has played out where undeniably bright AGWer scientists still claim they are unable to understand the problem.