Glimmer of hope for consensus climate honesty is short-lived

Canada Free Press ^ | February 16, 2009 | Paul MacRae

[neverdem]

Deplorable track record in predicting a great deal of warming

The true mark of a theory is without doubt its ability to predict phenomena. --Baron Cuvier, 1822

Do not knowingly mislead, or allow others to be misled, about scientific matters. Present and review scientific evidence, theory or interpretation honestly and accurately.
--Proposed scientific code of ethics

For one giddy, almost magical moment, I thought the “consensus” climate science community, or at least a small portion of it, had finally come to its senses. I should have known better.

The almost-magical moment came on reading a headline in the U.K. Guardian online. It read: “Scientists must rein in misleading climate change claims: Overplaying natural variations in the weather diverts attention from the real issues.” The article was by Dr. Vicky Pope of the British Meteorological (Hadley) Centre, one of the four major centres monitoring climate.

Finally! I thought. The consensus climate scientists who believe, passionately but with almost no scientific evidence beyond computer models, that the planet is warming, that it’s all humanity’s fault, and that we’re heading for oblivion, are willing to admit they’ve been wildly exaggerating the threat of warming to places like the Arctic.

Pope even seemed to agree, noting:

Recent headlines have proclaimed that Arctic summer sea ice has decreased so much in the past few years that it has reached a tipping point and will disappear very quickly...

--snip--

For warming believers, when it’s warming that’s climate, when it’s cooling that’s weather...

[neverdem]

Check the right sidebar. It's set up for posting here with FReep This, just below the printer friendly link.

[neverdem]

Check the right sidebar. It's set up for posting here with FReep This, just below the printer friendly link.

fanfan, did you know about that?

[Jim Robinson]

cool

[Robert A Cook PE]

Can we get “global warming” added as a “topic” or “discussion point” - We are getting five to ten AGW stories a day for the past three years.

AGW was the tipping point - the focus and justification - for Pelosi’s “energy policies” that drove up oil prices from 2006 through mid-summer 2008.

And those oil prices were what tipped over the economy into the spring-summer recession which killed our economy with the bank and mortgage failures in fall 2008.

[steelyourfaith]

Thanx !

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[neverdem]

The Real State of the Union MUST READ analysis of entitlement programs, it's abysmal.

How Democracies Become Tyrannies MUST READ discussion of Plato's Republic

Reality Intrudes on the Drug War

Can Israel make it alone?

Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[SuziQ]

But, then, no consensus climate scientist wants to admit even the teeniest, tiniest possibility that he/she could be wrong. Do that and, even worse than global warming, the research funding and jobs might dry up.

Exactly. It's all about the generous funding and grants to try to prove AGW. The folks who express skepticism about AGW certainly aren't getting any money for research.

[BIGLOOK]

Figure 1: IPCC computer predictions of warming versus real-world temperature data (blue and green lines)

Well that does it......Reality sucks!

[fanfan]

No, I hadn’t noticed.

Very nice.

[SunkenCiv]

FReep This? Where?

[SunkenCiv]

Oh, never mind, I see it now.

I wish the code here still supported a coded “subject” as it used to. :’) :’) :’)

[StACase]

[StACase]

[StACase]

Sorry about the double post, you think you forgot to hit “Post” so you go back and click on it, and lo and behold two posts show up, Oh well!