Archive for the ‘Lukewarmers’ Category

#4 – Why I’m lukewarm to climate change…

June 9, 2017

Reason #4: Dinking with the data

=========

I’m neither a denier nor a zealot …  so, according to British writer (& phrase-coiner) Matt Ridley, I’m a “lukewarmer”.

In a prior posts, I covered:

Reason #1Unsettling Science … I’ve gotten  cognitive whiplash from “Ice Age” u-turning to  “Global Warming”  …  which was slowed by an “18-year Pause” … and then wrapped in a catch-all “Climate Change”.

Reason #2Al Gore and his doomsday prediction …  in 2016 we passed his point of no return towards a true planetary emergency  … without the planet melting or exploding … and with Manhattan still above water (I think).

Reason #3The “97% of scientists” baloney … an oft-repeated claim based on bad data science: a very small,  hand-picked sample of climate change papers, not a projectable sample of scientists … which literally put words into authors’ mouths … i.e. bad data science.

Let’s move on…

========

Reason #4: Dinking with the data

Here’s a case in point:

Remember the 18-year “”Global Warming “Pause”?

Raw recorded temperature data slowed that temperatures had flattened out for a recent 18 year period.

English translation: no evidence of global warming.

image

========

Well, in 2015,  a team of scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Centers for Environmental Information* (NCEI) made some “adjustments” to global surface temperature data. Source

English translation: they dinked with the data.

Among the results:  the 18-year pause that was evident in the raw data went away (chart above).

More broadly, the revised (i.e. manually manipulated) data reversed an 80-year cooling trend evident in the raw data … and validated a warming trend that was not  evident until the temperature data was revised. Source

As Gomer Pyle would say: “Surprise, surprise, surprise.”

Scientists that I know wouldn’t think of manually “adjusting” their data when they didn’t get the results they expected.

That would be bad science, right?

But, it doesn’t seem to deter the climate scientists.

Maybe the adjustments are legit … I don’t know.

Nonetheless, they seem pretty fishy to me.

And, gives me another reason to be lukewarm.

========= 

#HomaFiles

Follow on Twitter @KenHoma            >> Latest Posts

=========

#2 – Why I’m lukewarm to climate change …

June 7, 2017

Reason #2: Al Gore and his his Doomsday Predictions

=========

I’m neither a denier nor a zealot …  so, according to British writer (& phrase-coiner) Matt Ridley, I’m a “lukewarmer”.

In a prior post, I covered reason #1 … Unsettling Science  … I’ve gotten  cognitive whiplash from “Ice Age” u-turning to  “Global Warming”  …  which was slowed by an “18-year Pause” … and then wrapped in a catch-all “Climate Change”.

Sorry, but this just doesn’t strike me as settled science.

Let’s move on…

========

My 2nd reason: Al Gore and his doomsday predictions .

image

========

Let me be unscientifically caddy for a moment.

I think Al Gore is a complete dufass who has raked millions preaching on behalf of climate change.

I personally don’t believe a thing that the dude says.  Period.

As a recovering marketer, I think the zealots would be better off with PeeWee Herman as their front-man.

OK, with that out of the way, let’s get specific ….

(more…)

Why I’m a “lukewarmer” … ambivalent to climate change.

June 6, 2017

Reason #1: From “The Coming Ice Age” … to “Global Warming” … to “18 year Pause” … to “Climate Change”

=======

Amid the hysteria over President Trump’s ditching of the Paris Accords, I had a long talk with myself.

“Self,” I asked “Why are you so apathetic to the pending Apocalypse?”

My first reason: the wide swings in the “branding” of the impending disaster that “scientists” anticipate.

For example, back in the late 1950s (yes, I was alive then), scientists were already touting the next ice age.

clip_image002

========

That crisis scenario caught traction for a couple of decades…

(more…)