I have gotten something like 6 zillion emails asking that I link the Paul Hudson’s BBC News article “What happened to Global Warming.” Frequent readers of this and other science-based skeptic sites won’t find much new here, except the fact that is appeared on the BBC. Apparently it is now the most read article on the BBC site.
9 thoughts on “By Popular Demand…”
Comments are closed.
I think environmentalism exists only to give shrill, gullible douchebags meaning to their miserable lives.
Given this was the 3rd coldest summer on record for our state..and the crop yeilds show it…wouldn’t it make sense to update ALL the climate change data and rethink the Global Warming thing?? Would it not stand to reason that all the changes ALREADY made to clean-up and increase efficiancies in agriculture, forestry,manufacturing, etc. may just be kicking in and changing the tide? Most of the data ve seen is from 10 years ago or more. How can we make prudent decissions if our data is so outdated???
@ Timing
The problem is that we can’t really take the last couple chilly years to mean anything conclusive. One of the first things that either side of the argument brings up in the face of evidence that doesn’t match their theory is that climate moves in cycles. Simply jumping on every down(or up)turn in temps is not a conclusive or valuable argument.
We don’t have really reliable date back across multiple cycles (although lots of people like to pretend we do) so the real arguments are being waged arround theory not fact. Unfortunatly there isn’t a good way (in my oppinion) to get conclusive facts without waiting 50 years or so. Unfortunatly, politicians are unlikely to do that.
It is nice to see something sceptical or at least neutral in the MSM though, might get more people to actually think about the issue.
@ Bryan
It only took Hansen 9 years to go from trumpeting the next ice age to testifying about the coming Carbonagedon before congress in the Summer of 1988 – with the AC turned off to provide special effects.
The BBC might be worried about a change of Govt in the next year and needs to garner support although the Tory Leader is a Warmer anyway. Of more concern to me is our ABC (Australia) and my favorite science show, Catalyst. They have just aired a segment where Professor Steffen who is the Exec Dir of the National University Climate Change Institute. The presenter allowed him to make the standard seas are rising, we are heading toward a tipping point, catasrophe is around the corner statements without requiring him to give a few examples or a smidgin of proof. Thats in depth reporting for you. We pay for this crap through tax. The ABC is Govt funded. The prof wants us to pass an ETS to save us from more droughts and violent storms (suitably illustrated with file footage of same). Our last hope is for the US Senate to bin the Cap and Trade until after Copenhagen.
@papertiger
I assume you’re holding up Hansen as a model of what not to do? If you are, that’s my point exactly.
@Bryan
Not actually. I think the concept of climate defined as 30 year average of temp/precip is a bulshit designed for the convenience of newsmen, and scam artists like Hansen.
They’ll ignore it when it becomes convenient to do so.
We only handycap ourselves by honoring what they ignore.
The Beeb have now made a comment on this matter including the priceless quote “As anyone who has monitored the BBC’s output over recent years will know, the BBC does not have a position on this matter.” I am quoting from memory so that may not be word perfect but it is close. As I had just watched a BBC news item about a boffin who had been busy drilling holes in the Arctic ice which stated that the Arctic ice cap “Could” disappear altogether within ten years, I gave out a snort of derision. Of course I strongly doubt that a reputable scientist would have said anything of the sort.