24 Replies to “The Sound Of Settled Science”

  2. Why is it taken as gospel that the level of CO2 in say 1970 was normal?
    There are a lot of indications suggesting that it was too low then.
    Desertification is one. Much of the desert in the Middle East was forest 2000 years ago.
    Australian scientists have found that with the tiny increase in CO2 levels at present, desert green has increased 11%.
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/extra-carbon-dioxide-boosting-growth-in-desert-plants-csiro/story-e6frgcjx-1226673969712

  3. Gee I seem to remember that the flappy headed nuts were saying just yesterday that the suns median output had no impact on the earth.

  7. Apparently, it hasn’t occurred to those of the settled science that the rapid warming in the 80s&90s might actually have been the blip. That the mild and natural warming from the end LIA is now resuming its steady climb.
    Manmade CO2 “pollution” does cause warming according to physics but only in the range of around 1C if I remember correctly. The rest of the warming is due to positive feedbacks. Unfortunately the modelling of clouds and oceans is not well understood. The scientists may have gotten it wrong – water vapour, oceans and other natural events are compensating with negative feedbacks.
    There is no increase in extreme events (except in total cost of damages and that’s due to buildup of expensive housing in disaster prone areas). The Earth is greening up and there’s less real pollution. People are wealthier, healthier and living longer than ever. All things non-political are improving.
    All that money wasted on Big Green – congratulations climate scientists

  8. A lot of the hysteria over global warming can be attributed to spending too much time on farcebook believing what their friends say.

  11. Most of the pinheads making these idiotic unsupportable claims(unsupportable because they’re all lies) stand to rake in boatloads of cash at the expense of you n me. Besides, when has the truth mattered to a Progressive?

  12. The recent paper Re Qbism (Hans Cristian von Baeyer) suggests that Quantum Mechanics is nothing more than Horse Shit Imagination. The scientific Mathematical Logic had its Genesis in a diseased mind. Flush all the BS Science & start again.
    Mathematics does not create science! It is a tool used to explain complex science. The Global warming folks don’t have any Science to explain.. It’s all nonsense
    De-fund all research that depends solely on Quantum Mechanics
    JMHO

  13. But, Maggie Atwood said we were on course for what has been predicted. I’m confused. Posted by: soundofmusak
    That’s what happens when you believe what twits say.

  14. mologist wIt might have been interesting to hear what Margaret Atwood’s father had to say, as a distinguished entomologist. But probably there was concern about destruction of habitat; and, of course, comments on the real heavy-duty pollution which was our lot back then. Dear Margaret is more than a little obtuse not to have noticed that pollution in the real sense is almost nonexistent in Canada now (a little in Hamilton, perhaps). As for destruction of habitat, well, that continues, but not very markedly; and vegetation is very aggressive in taking over abandoned buildings etc. We have of course unloaded some of our former problems on the third world.
    I doubt that an entomologist would have had the faintest notion of the greenhouse effect etc. back in 1948.
    As for the IPCC’s little problem, I will say that they are fatal. I don’t know if global warming is real at this time, and neither do the IPCC members, nor those of you who might be reading this. What I do see is that the IPCC’s predictions have FAILED. Their big problem is broken theory. Not only is it broken, but it has led (through predictions of warm winters which in fact turned out to be dangerously cold) to real hardship and even death for the elderly in the UK.
    The Italian seismologists who falsely predicted that the probability of an earthquake was low were tried and convicted (I don’t know if they have actually seen the insides of a jail, but they should). The same should be the fate of the IPCC leadership.

  17. I don’t know if global warming is real at this time
    It’s been gradually warming since the little ice age 300 years ago [the coldest it’s been in the last 10,000 years], and will continue to gradually warm till all the ice is gone, then it will start to cool again as it has for the past 3.5 million years since the drifting of the continents closed the gap at Panama and altered the ocean currents. Human activity might be slowing the onset of the next ice age. Only idiots have a problem with this.

  19. The Americans must be so proud of their very attentive President, who seems not to have heard that the science that is settled, isn’t settled at all, and is committed to taking more billions out of their rather desperate economy to fight a problem that isn’t.

  21. Now they are looking for excuses. Are they under the volcano or the dog basket? They have to keep the scam going.

  22. Thy don’t have the math either. But quantum mechanics is a very good mathematical description of atomic behavior, but our conceptualization of it is lacking.

  23. Robert I agree climate science has nowhere near the rigour of quantum mechanics in which physicists agree they can’t yet prove the existence of dark matter and dark energy or why the universe is expanding at ever faster rates or even why their measurement of the mass of the universe have turned out to be incorrect.
    They keep researching while clearly stating they don’t have all the answers. They don’t make flawed conclusions then concoct bogus proofs, then pat each other on the back for their wise consensus. IOW they respect the scientific method and work within it.
    OTOH what did “climate scientists” do? Their AGW concoction was an iffy scientific proposition (which they actually admitted to 20 years ago) to begin with, with CO2 feedback effects wildly exaggerated despite no observable or empirical supporting evidence. They never attempted to disprove their hypothesis and slimed anyone who did. If you believed solar activity might explain climate variation you were labelled a Big Oil holocaust denier who was most likely a racist. I’m still waiting for my cheque from Exxon.
    Once opposition or skepticism was silenced and/or cowed, they invented their consensus which apparently meant proven, just as CO2 meant pollution I guess.
    Despite all of their hypothesis has indeed been disproven by any reasonable scientific standard.
    Yes the climate has warmed since industrialization. Yes atmospheric CO2 levels continue to grow. No they’re not causing anything close to the catastrophic warming/tipping point the statist rent seeking alarmists predicted. If we dismantle productive economies with punishment/climate justice policies the world will end up a much poorer and much dirtier place. Innovation, including proper energy technology research (IOW not bird blenders) will happen in modern, not modernizing, economies provided they’re not hamstrung with idiotic carbon taxation and regulation policies which hurt the poorest in our societies the most.
    Maybe we could all go back to dealing with actual pollution instead of branding Canada a climate criminal with our statistically insignificant contribution to atmospheric CO2 growth.
    Thank you, rant over.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation