It’s still warming and its still our fault, even if it’s not!
The Earth has changed in “unprecedented ways” since 1950, the U.N. says, and its scientists are 95 percent certain that humans are responsible.
Yet the planet has largely stopped warming over the past 15 years, data shows — and a landmark report released Friday by the U.N.’s climate group could not explain why the Mercury has stopped rising.
Global surface temperatures rose rapidly during the 70s, but have been relatively flat over the past decade and a half, rising only 0.05 degrees Celsius (0.09 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade according to data from the U.K.’s weather-watching Met Office, a trend current models of the world’s climate have been unable to predict. A draft of the report leaked in early September acknowledged that trend and put it bluntly: We simply can’t explain it.
They have NO idea what’s happening and why…but they are 100% sure its our fault. (Only a coincidence that their funding comes from this result)
But a final draft of the report released Friday morning by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) strips out the failure of models and explains away the downward trend.
“Due to natural variability, trends based on short records are very sensitive to the beginning and end dates and do not in general reflect long-term climate trends,” the new report reads.
A section that suggests volcanoes and solar activity may have affected the warming has also been removed in the final version.
This just in, your creative writing class you take in college will now double as “Scientific Writing 100” in all accredited universities.
H/T Mrs. Weer’d
Remember when scientists had to figure out how to perform an experiment that would back up their predictive models? And then openly show the results of said experiment, and have others repeat the experiment for verification?
Remember when skeptic wasn’t a bad word in scientific circles?
Remember when the creed Nullius in verba was actually taken seriously?
Oh but apparently science now works by faith. Sure the IPCC won’t explain why they can’t predict for empirical phenomena, that doesn’t mean their predictions shouldn’t be trusted! And if you question them that’s blasphemy… uh I mean it’s unscientific.
As always the tell is in the projection and insecurity. Here we have a scientific field where experimentation is nigh impossible (go ahead call up McMaster and order a crate of earths), and where we’ve only got one data set of global temperatures (and it’s a very incomplete data set given measurement error, calibration issues, and that for most of the time-span we have to use proxy temperature data).
Add into this a global system that literally combines solar influences, oceanography, vulcanology, thermodynamics, meteorology, fluid dynamics, gasdynamics, and ecology…
And they have the gall to say the “science is settled”?
Really, with that uphill climb you guys managed to make predictions that rock solid?
You can tell the effect of changing the atmospheric gas composition will have on global climate and through model verification know that it will be due to that specific change?
Wow non climate scientists must be a bunch of lazy idiots.
People who say “the science is settled” (about anything) make me want to shout “You Sir, are a poor scientist!”
s
Or “We had a bunch of scientists come together and reach a consensus.”
Argument ad authority is rather… anti-science.
Ah well, thus quackery always rises.
People like to forget just how popular Eugenics was for example.
(Or that Social Darwinist was what Eugenicists called their opponents. On the grounds that if you didn’t “manage” society then people would just breed all willy nilly and it’d be survival of the fittest.”
Shockingly enough, there is ONE phenomenon that shows a nearly 1:1 correlation with mid and long range earth average temperature swings. . .
The average temperature swings of just about every OTHER rocky planetary body in the Solar System we can readily check (accounting for atmosphere and rotation periods). In other words, when temps start to trend up on Earth on a “climate” scale, they tend to do so on, say, Mars. Likewise in reverse.
Hmmm. . . if only there was one single influence that affects BOTH planets and is large enough to overpower other, weaker, influences. . . maybe even one which has periodic vairability we can readily track. . . like say, the freaking average solar output of the freaking Sun. . .