Monday, June 15, 2009
Global Warming - A call for proper science
Christopher Booker has been following this for a long time.
I wish an American main stream media writer had the same courage to spit out the Kool-Aid...
I wish an American main stream media writer had the same courage to spit out the Kool-Aid...
In the U.K. Telegraph, Christopher Booker writes:
"The fact is that what has been happening to the world's climate in recent years, since global temperatures ceased to rise after 1998, was not predicted by any of those officially-sponsored models. The discrepancy between their predictions and observable data becomes more glaring with every month that passes.
It won't do for believers in warmist orthodoxy to claim that, although temperatures may be falling, this is only because they are "masking an underlying warming trend that is still continuing" - nor to fob us off with assurances that the "German model shows that higher temperatures than 1998, the warmest year on record, are likely to return after 2015".
In view of what is now at stake, such quasi-religious incantations masquerading as science are something we can no longer afford. We should get back to proper science before it is too late."
Comments:
<< Home
I wonder why Alarmists never say they're looking for the cause of either the lack of warming since 1998 or the slight decrease in temps since then. Could it be they are not looking? Could it be that their paymasters won't pay for research on why the climate would cool, even in the face of ever-increasing manmade CO2 emissions?
Alarmists tell us that natural climate cycles cannot explain "recent" warming....that only manmade CO2 can explain it. Why then do Alarmists conveniently say that manmade warming is being over-ridden by a natural cooling cycle? Do they think nature can only work in one direction? Or is what they now tell us a lame explanation that's the best they can come up with?
I chuckle to imagine Alarmists telling their flock of believers to wait a few years for the "second coming" of AGW. I guess, if/when that day comes, the Alarmists and their flock can rejoice and celebrate the return of doom and gloom for the planet.
--Jeff
Alarmists tell us that natural climate cycles cannot explain "recent" warming....that only manmade CO2 can explain it. Why then do Alarmists conveniently say that manmade warming is being over-ridden by a natural cooling cycle? Do they think nature can only work in one direction? Or is what they now tell us a lame explanation that's the best they can come up with?
I chuckle to imagine Alarmists telling their flock of believers to wait a few years for the "second coming" of AGW. I guess, if/when that day comes, the Alarmists and their flock can rejoice and celebrate the return of doom and gloom for the planet.
--Jeff
# posted by 
: Tue Jun 16, 04:44:00 PM EDT
: Tue Jun 16, 04:44:00 PM EDT
Hi Jeff,
Thank you for your comment.
Actually, I think the "flock of believers" is already being told that when their eyes see examples of cooling, it really means warming.
The term "sheeple" just came to mind {smile}.
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment.
Actually, I think the "flock of believers" is already being told that when their eyes see examples of cooling, it really means warming.
The term "sheeple" just came to mind {smile}.
<< Home
