Are you a global warming skeptic? There are plenty of good reasons why you might be.
. . . .
Without good answers to all these complaints, global-warming skepticism seems sensible. But now let me explain why you should not be a skeptic, at least not any longer (The Case Against Global-Warming Skepticism).
BEST Project claims for itself,
The most important indicator of global warming, by far, is the land and sea surface temperature record. This has been criticized in several ways, including the choice of stations and the methods for correcting systematic errors. The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature study sets out to to do a new analysis of the surface temperature record in a rigorous manner that addresses this criticism.
Not sure this settles the issue for me, but it certainly re-stirs the conversation. For example, Roger Pielke has some questions about whether Muller's analysis doesn't really add anything (Comment On The Article in the Economist On Rich Muller’s Data Analysis | Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr.).
1 comment:
The signal issue, for the politicians and bureaucrats, is AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming.)
Do mankind's actions cause the warming? If so, punitive taxation of certain specific activities is justified (according to government.)
If man's activities do not contribute to global warming, but it is, instead, caused by solar activity (for example,) then prohibitions and taxation won't impede global warming (but it WILL fill someone's pockets.)
THAT's the issue I contend is contrived by the policy-makers -- a means of separating individuals from their money.
Follow the money....
Post a Comment