Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Is it warming or cooling?


“We have been building models and there are now robust contradictions,” says Liu, a professor in the UW-Madison Center for Climatic Research. “Data from observation says global cooling. The physical model says it has to be warming.”

Okay, here's a thought. Stop trying to draw conclusions from questionable data.

When you get problems like this - the solution is to toss ALL of the preconceived theories.  Go back and look at the data collection methods and determine if they are adequate to the problem.  If they are, everyone needs to agree on what the hell that data is.   It's no good if one group sabotages the data to support their preferred Policy.   Let's try SCIENCE.  Why?  well the left is doing policy and calling it science, and the right is pointing out the BIG ASS HOLES in their data and how bad the computer models are that the left has come up with to support their chosen policy.  But who the hell is actually doing science?    There's probably a few, but with all the noise, it' hard to hear what they have to say. 

I think mother nature is going to solve this problem by doing something nobody wants, in a way nobody expects, because she's tired of listening to the constant squabbling....  "Just wait till your father get's home!"

The scientists politicians call this problem the Holocene temperature conundrum. It has important implications for understanding climate change and evaluating climate models, as well as for the benchmarks used to create climate models for the future. It does not, the authors emphasize, change the evidence of human impact  lack of evidence of human impact on global climate beginning in the 20th century.

       What they said  What they should have said

As near as I can tell, the left saw some localized events, Greenland Ice cover melt, receding glaciers, etc and jumped to the conclusion - Global Warming, then went about faking what ever data they thought might get them additional grant money and have been screening PANIC ever since.  Many on the right simply say - There's no warming! And while they seem to have the data on their side, it doesn't explain the melting.

Frankly the data, as it stands, sans serious tweaking to reenforce policy, pretty much says - WE DON'T FRIGGING KNOW.   There are reasons for some of the local phenomena,  that are currently blamed on "global warming".  But if there's no warming - and there doesn't seem to have been any, then we can probably conclude that's not the cause.   Maybe it's time to start looking elsewhere.    Maybe even use real SCIENCE - yeah I know Math is Hard, Science is really hard....

I haven't heard anyone claim the melt data is bogus.   It might be as simple as changes in volcanic activity under the ice, might be something else altogether.    Might be bogus too, although faking a receding glacier might be tough.   Don't know, maybe that's just what glaciers do when they're not getting bigger. 

I'm sort of curious as to why no one actually wants to know the real reason.

No comments:

Post a Comment