It was not that long ago a bunch of researchers got on a boat and started chugging for the South Pole to find evidence of the melting glaciers and global warming, and they got stuck in the ice and it took three ice breakers and a helicopter to rescue them. Yet they still carry the day in the pop culture that global warming is happening.
The difference is that we have the hardest and most painful evidence that there was a Holocaust. But, for the global warming scenario that is causing such hysteria, we have only a movie made by a politician and mathematical models whose results change drastically when you change a few of the arbitrarily selected variables.
Research data on climate change do not show that human use of hydrocarbons is harmful. To the contrary, there is good evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is environmentally helpful.
Thus evidence that contradicts the global warming theory, climate Chicken Littles enlist as evidence for the correctness of their theory; every permutation in weather patterns — warm or cold — is said to be a consequence of that warming or proof of it.
No subject over the past 30 years has lent itself so readily to politicians memorizing and repeating combinations of words without the slightest idea of what they are talking about.
Jenkins is referring to climate change.
97 percent of the scientists who wrote articles in peer-reviewed journals believe that human activity is the fundamental reason we are seeing climate change.
I was shocked to find that there were actually climate scientists who wouldn't share the raw data, but would only share their conclusions in summary graphs that were used to prove their various theories about planet warming. In fact I began to smell something really bad, and the worse that smell got, the deeper I looked.
And many of the alarmists on global warming, they've got a problem cause the science doesn't back them up. And in particular, satellite data demonstrate for the last 17 years, there's been zero warming. None whatsoever.
"not a scientific body capable of accurately assessing the facts about global warming".
In the APS (American Physical Society) it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible? The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years, which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this 'warming' period.'
I don't think there is any global warming. I don't see the statistical data for that.
Even though all that CO2 has been spewed and belched into the atmosphere, there isn't any warming. Therefore, the person, people, whatever, predicting global warming for any reason have been wrong for 20 consecutive years. Every year for 20 years the supporters of this theory have been wrong, as wrong as it's possible to be. That means that the person predicting global warming is not credible and does not deserve to be listened to.
We have little choice but to place a certain level of trust in scientists - even when it comes to the model-driven speculative discipline of climate change. And, need it be said, most scientists take great care in being honest, principled and precise.
