[al baby]

This is one question

H ow accurate were our observations 100 plus years ago?

[Mr. K]

THAT is the single most important question in this whole $Trillion dollar fiasco.

There is a concept in science called SIGNIFICANT DIGITS. It basically explains why you cannot be more accurate than your measuring device.

If all you have is a yardstick, you cannot express measurment of distance in thousandths of an inch.

So... if all you have from past history is tree rings, you cannot say global warming has increased .5 degres. It is fundamentally impossible.

But that is the data they used to show the ‘hockey stick’ graph, which in itself was skewed to show a sharp turn, and then later shown to be based on FAKE DATA.

So... where do we go to get a refund on the $trillons of dollars wasted on this FRAUD?

And how do we stop Congress? They are STILL talking about the carbon tax.

[American in Israel]

So global warming hysteria is based not on any accurate measurements of global climate, but rather on "proxies." That is, scientists give their interpretation of tree rings and bacterial samples in fossils. Global warming "science" is strikingly similar to a witch doctor reading the entrails of a goat.

I think the best test of our computer models is when they set them up to predict the past. They fail miserably. But that does prove one thing, our computer models will come up with the wrong answer.