Navigation | Its begins…

Its begins…

How could it go down if CO2 went up?

I’ve been preaching for awhile that the human impact on Global warming was a huge farce made up by scientists whose grants and paychecks completely depend on perpetuating the myth…. but they’ve always pointed to the data…. uh oh…

http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Worldwide+Global+Cooling/article10866.htm

Turns out all the major reporting agencies agree that the latest data is way lower than previous years….(almost like its a cycle)  In fact, its really, really hard to say that this year was caused by another cause without saying that that cause is more influential than carbon dioxide.  Clearly CO2 did not decrease all of the sudden.  In fact, the scientists were predicting a really hot year due to the increase of carbon dioxide. 

I’m telling you, the wheels are coming off of this thing.  The environmentalists will have a new tree to hug within 10 years.

Btw, here is the NASA graph in case you don’t trust the source… http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.C.lrg.gif 

Filed by niekamp10 at February 27th, 2008 under Website

This is such an interesting subject. Niether the article nor the graph have enough data to completely debunk the “myth” - as a stats guy, Curt, you know that you need more than one data point. Day-to-day, season-to-season and region-to-region weather fluctuates for many reasons. Even year-to-year weather or temperatures fluctuations are likely too short a time period when you’re talking about WORLD temps moving up or down by tenths of a degree. To be clear I’m not wholey supporting the Global Warming theory either. I have the same concerns with that data. Everyone wants data to point to and, unfortunately, the complete picture (good or bad) probably won’t be available for 10’s or 100’s of years.

That being said, I have tried to reduce my impact. Whether or not the earth is going to flood or implode in 5 years, I’ve started to be a little more aware of my wasteful use of fossil fuels. A little change in habit can only help.

Comment by Kevin Meyer — February 28, 2008 @ 10:44 am

Exactly my point! There is significant variation in the temperature. As we know from statistics there is a signal/noise ratio. The signal being the difference, and the noise being the variation. If the S/N is not high enough, it is considered random.

Global Warming activists have failed the S/N test over and over again. But they still want to impose cap and trade systems that will tax our employers and convince them to leave the US… all based on erred conclusions.

That doesn’t mean I’m not for conservation. I’m just against government imposed conservation.

Comment by niekamp10 — February 29, 2008 @ 9:01 am

Totally agree.

Comment by Kevin Meyer — February 29, 2008 @ 9:27 am

I like to recommend this Michael Crichton lecture on the subject:

http://www.michaelcrichton.com/speech-complexity.html

Comment by Phil — March 3, 2008 @ 8:22 pm

Leave a comment