April 3, 2009


From the defender of the Faith ANDy of NYT

Study: Cool Spells Normal in Warming World

Funny I don't recall much talk about this before it started getting you? I love this line:

To show, in a peer-reviewed scientifically defensible way that there is no reason to expect the climate to warm in a monotonic type fashion, that there is natural variability along with anthropogenic forced warming and we shouldn't’t expect each year to be warmer than the next or even a run of 10 years always to show warming. That we can get a 10- or even 15-year period with no real change in globally averaged temperature even though in the end we have strong global warming.

That is the scientific ways of CYA, boy they must really be getting desperate. But I do not know what makes them think that if people are growing more skeptical as time goes on that they are now going to convince people that they knew this all along. Of course all they have to do is convince a select few politicians, who are on the boat already, Oh well.

And here is another point to ponder from ANDy of NYT vast sums of wisdom:

There was another useful effort by climate scientists and communication specialists this week, a letter to the journal Science, “Creating a Common Climate Language,” urging international organizations to standardize basic terms in assessing climate science to gauge policy responses. (You can download the letter at Michael Mann’s Web page.)

The more work that the science community does along these lines, the better. There is a dizzying range of official definitions of the term “climate change” itself, for starters. Some assessments track only concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere; others consolidate the influence of all greenhouse gases into a “carbon dioxide equivalent” measurement. There’s no common number for the globe’s “pre-industrial” average temperature, etc. When entering any debate, a first step clearly is to settle on definitions

Putting aside the obvious. Why in the world should the world trust a science that is in so much disarray that it does not even have definitions or defined parameters for the very items they are trying to scare us all into subservience about? a "dizzying range of official definitions of the term “climate change”itself.Well this is becoming more and more obvious all the time as this very article makes clear. A new study to prove that global warming can take decade long breaks, but was not in the scientific literature until it became necessary to protect it's make believe science from the scourge of reality.. Rediculous

No comments:

Post a Comment