tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611639517962742486.post1897517544857511714..comments2024-03-25T15:31:12.151-07:00Comments on We Live In A Political World: #27 / Eventually Facts PrevailGary A. Pattonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15049925834933920507noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611639517962742486.post-49662900964416589912014-01-28T22:23:31.887-08:002014-01-28T22:23:31.887-08:00I'll just leave you to your lonely science den...I'll just leave you to your lonely science denial.@PhysicsPolicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04664172982768472896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611639517962742486.post-61417636386477816722014-01-28T18:52:57.084-08:002014-01-28T18:52:57.084-08:00Waving the IPCC URL is no guarantee of scientific ...Waving the IPCC URL is no guarantee of scientific rigor. The IPCC is a United Nations policy organization, an arm of the UN's Sustainable Development program. <br /><br />In fact, there is as much disagreement within the IPCC as there is in the broader scintific community.<br /><br />"Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007." U.S. Senate, Environment and Public Works Committee, Minority Staff Report (Inhofe), December 20, 2007. http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=...<br /> <br />Page 7: "Dr. Richard Courtney, a UN IPCC expert reviewer and a UK-based climate and atmospheric science consultant: "To date, no convincing evidence for AGW (anthropogenic global warming) has been discovered. And recent global climate behavior is not consistent with AGW model predictions.' "Michael A. Lewishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04980105313542633114noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611639517962742486.post-7739806662592012522014-01-28T13:24:47.946-08:002014-01-28T13:24:47.946-08:00This is you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%2...This is you.<br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29<br /><br />This is scientific consensus.<br />http://www.ipcc.ch/@PhysicsPolicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04664172982768472896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611639517962742486.post-58441939349572950242014-01-28T09:55:44.468-08:002014-01-28T09:55:44.468-08:00I'm always disappointed when posters resort to...I'm always disappointed when posters resort to name-calling. Calling someone a troll stifles discussion and says more about the name caller than the recipient of such vituperation.<br /><br />Careful readers will note that I did not say "recent warming can be explained by ice (sic) solar cycles alone." I merely explained the natural solar cycles that have geologically resulted in repeated glacial advances.<br /><br />There is no "consensus theory" that human produced CO2 alone is causing the present increase in global average surface temperature. While anthropogenic CO2 (5% of total CO2 production) may influence natural climate variation, it's contribution is far outweighed by natural climate cycles.<br /><br />Therefore, draconian economic measures can do little to change natural climate variation. Rather than attempting the impossibility of "stopping" climate change, we must accommodate and adapt to natural climate variation such that whatever future climate brings, we can continue without undue negative impact to human societies and the natural world.<br />Michael A. Lewishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04980105313542633114noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611639517962742486.post-33091169975342142532014-01-27T23:03:58.997-08:002014-01-27T23:03:58.997-08:00"Just the facts" is an oversimplificatio..."Just the facts" is an oversimplification and leaves room for trolls like Hayduke.<br /><br />Science is a process that involves theory and evidence (also called "facts").<br /><br />Anthropogenic climate change due to greenhouse gas emission from the burning of fossil fuels is predicted by basic theory, computer models, and confirmed by the evidence.<br /><br />All the evidence (ice cores, recent air/surface/ocean temperature measurements, net glacial melting, insolation from space satellites, etc.) agrees with the consensus theory.<br /><br />All this evidence STRONGLY CONTRADICTS with Hayduke's hypothesis, that recent warming can be explained by ice solar cycles alone.@PhysicsPolicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04664172982768472896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3611639517962742486.post-52401671229840298042014-01-27T19:51:21.851-08:002014-01-27T19:51:21.851-08:00The "Just Facts" web site cited is an i...The "Just Facts" web site cited is an incredibly important resource. I hope you have the time to read it thoroughly and dispassionately.<br /><br />You'll find after reading all the citations on this site that, in fact, "The Facts" are that the world is NOT heating up. Global average surface temperature has been increasing since around 1700 AD, as the global climate recovers from the Little Ice Age. <br /><br />But "The World" is not heating up. "The World" is slowly cooling and has been for the past 2000 years. This long cooling trend is due to natural solar cycles caused by the elliptical orbit of the sun around the moon that precesses over 25,000 years, changing the relationship between the sun and the earth. This, in combination with the sun's interior magnetic cycles, causes the earth's ice ages and interglacial periods. <br /><br />We are now at the end of the Holocene interglacial, trembling at the abyss before we plunge into the next glacial advance. Just as in every other glacial cycle, global average surface temperature and CO2 have increased concurrently until the point where interglacial ends and the next cold period begins.<br /><br />This didn't begin with the Industrial revolution. This has been going on for 2.5 million years in the most recent glaciation. <br /><br />There's no reason to think that this interglacial/glacial advance is any different than the four other interglacial/glacial advance series that have preceded itMichael A. Lewishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04980105313542633114noreply@blogger.com