Quote:
Originally Posted by **********
|
This just about says it all from that page: Predicting and Modeling Global Changes.
"Predictions" and "models" do not necessarily equate to fact or the truth. Many of their predictions and models have been flat out wrong.
For example:
?Shindell?s model predicts that if greenhouse gases continue to increase, winter in the Northern Hemisphere will continue to warm. ?In our model, we?re seeing a very large signal of global warming and it?s not a naturally occurring thing. It?s most likely linked to greenhouse gases,? he said.
- NASA, GISS, 2 June 1999
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by **********;
Yes. The chart you displayed clearly shows the warming trend. Again it doesn't take much to get us into problems. Don't forget that we are looking at the average temperature of the entire planet and specifically, the average temperature of the ocean. A few degrees warmer means less ice, for less time, and more water. More water (and warmer water) is just the beginning of the problems too.
|
So a rise of 4 tenths of a degree over thirty years is an impending catastrophe in your eyes? 4 tenths of a degree is inside the margin of error for temperature data. Change the scale on the Y-axis or plot actual temperature and that trend disappears.
There is no such thing as an actual "average" temperature for the entire planet and/or the ocean. There is simply too much of the planet that is not measured and the parts that are measured are often measured incorrectly. The "average" temperature that they quote is a best guess based on extrapolation and models. The only measurements that are accurate and reliable are the satellite measurements as shown in the graph I posted. Sure the satellite record shows a very slight warming trend but that is over a very short time span and it is hardly a catastrophic increase.
You say it doesn't take "much" to get us into problems. Define "much". I think the planet is far more dynamic than you think. If such minor fluctuations could cause so much damage then life on earth would never have flourished like it has.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by **********;
Why do you call them "Alarmists" and "Activists"?
|
Because that's what they are.
Hansen has left a very large trail of failed alarmist predictions behind him. After failing to get his way by trying to scare people he decides to quit his job and become a full time professional whiner and complainer about not getting his way - aka activist.
James Hansen to quit NASA, become full-time climate activist
Schmidt is a modeller who is responsible for driving much of the alarmism based on his largely faulty models. Models are not scientific fact. They are best guesses based on often faulty data. Garbage in, garbage out.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by **********;
He also claims that there has been no warming since 1997, and ignores the hottest years on record (2010, 2014). Many other things he says are not supported by other scientists.
Is he right or wrong? Who really knows? I'm hoping he's right but the evidence disagrees with him.
|
According to the NASA satellite record there has been no statistically significant warming since 1997. Many scientists know that the ground based temperature record is flawed and unreliable and that we should rely more on the satellite data going forward.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by **********;
Why do you call this a "Witch Hunt"?
Serious question for you.
Here's a scientist making a claim. He can be right or wrong of course. Why not simply say that he is "right" or "wrong"? If the president (or anyone) says a scientist is wrong, why use the term "witch hunt"?
In other words, why demonize the person?
|
Because a "witch hunt" is exactly what it is:
Witch-hunt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quote:
|
In modern terminology 'witch-hunt' has acquired usage referring to the act of seeking and persecuting any perceived enemy, particularly when the search is conducted using extreme measures and with little regard to actual guilt or innocence. It is used whether or not it is sanctioned by the government, or merely occurs within the "court of public opinion".
|
The president and other politicians have gone way beyond simply saying that certain scientists are right or wrong:
https://www.barackobama.com/climate-change/
Democrats on ?witch hunt? for doomsday-denying climate scientists
Running Updates on the "Witch Hunt"
I don't know why you refuse to take a break from your little kool-aid sipping party and poke your head up out of your rabbit hole. Once you do it will not be hard for you to see reality more clearly.
.