Wednesday, January 22, 2014

4th or 7th Most Settled?

Was 2013 4th or 7th Hottest Year? It Depends Who You Ask -

When something is as settled as climate change,  it is hard to pin the number down to 4th or 7th. Just imagine the vast amount of "science" that went into picking the "base climate" from the chart below as "Departure from the 1951-1980 average". Why, between 1880 and 2013, we have fluctuated as much as between .6 and .8 to the high, and .4 and .6 to the low! Why, in 130 years our temperature has fluctuated nearly 1.4 degrees, and a full .2 degrees more to the high side than the low side!

Think of the brilliance of choosing the  "Mid 20th century baseline" of 1951 - 1980! How scientific! In fact, isn't it  TOTALLY INCREDIBLE that in the 4-5 BILLION years of earth history, the period from 1951-1980 is especially representative? During a "very significant percentage" of earths history, I'm thinking even the most "settled" of today's "climate scientists" would classify the human impact as "small"?

Pause for a moment as you look at the big colored global temps map and consider the "accuracy" of that global temperature calculation in 1880.  Satellite coverage must have been somewhat less than today, and I'm guessing that the many reporting stations at the poles, deepest Siberia and central Africa took slightly longer to get their data in! (polar bear / penguin couriers? listen to those drums ... temperature data!)   I just finished the "Heart of Darkness" which was set around 1900, and amazingly Kurtz didn't seem to be that excited about reporting the climate data from the Belgian Congo. (I'm sure it was colder then, but it sounded hot)

The sea ice chart goes ALL THE WAY BACK to 1979! Wow, that REALLY gives a nice sample out of 4-5 B years! It is growing on one pole and shrinking on the other. How can anyone POSSIBLY question the veracity of folks that use 130 years and a bit more than 30 years to provide "irrefutable scientific proof" that man is changing the climate of the planet? Why, in order to be a "Denier", one would have to be paid off by the oil industry! There is NO OTHER ANSWER!

*** I pause here to admit that I am a fully paid apologist for "Oil Industry Incorporated" ... the NSA knows it anyway, so I may as well fess up! The amount of money they have given me so far is, well, "significant" ... er at least as significant as 130 / 4,500,000,000 (.0000000289 significance) ***

Whew! I finally got that off my chest! Oh the shame!

The main reason I Blogged this is the predictions at the end:

"In the second half of 2014, we're looking at the likelihood of an El Niño starting, which will help warm 2014 over 2013," added Schmidt. "Depending on the size of the El Niño, it is likely to push perhaps either 2014 or 2015 quite a way up the rankings."
Note that in TRUE scientific fashion, if 2014 and 2015 ARE (by their own rather dubious calculations) "well up the rankings", then they will trumpet the OBVIOUS correctness of their "science". If '14 and '15 are "nothing special", or (gasp) cooler, then we will hear nothing about their prediction, and a "Denier" bringing it up is a non story. 

and so it goes. 

'via Blog this'

No comments:

Post a Comment