This issue has long been known to skeptics of global warming hysteria. The very means by which a temperature number is arrived at-- either an average, a high, a low (anomaly measurements) are fraught with both subjective interpretation (figuring out what numbers are signal vs noise and whether mismatches are the result of equipment changes malfunctions or exigencies) and a technical problem of putting too much weight on urban data that shows elevated temps due to things like machinery and asphalt. Whats worse it their claims about the paleoclimate record. Temp data is hard to settle on today with satellites and tens of thousands of modern weather stations collecting data, even high altitude balloons. But the hysteria crowds most important argument that CO2 is the cause is their reference to the historical, pre-technical temp record, through things like ice cores and tree rings. If they cant get the right number for todays temperature, on what basis can they claim that current warming (such as it is) is happening at an unnatural speed? We dont have the accurate records to know that is the case and plenty of anectdotal and textual evidence that weve heated up more and faster than now in our pre industrial history. In the end, when someone cuts and pastes a headline about such and such year being the warmest in the last X years, the number of ways that is bs are hard to tally because they are numerous and complex.
Posted on: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 21:06:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015