victor809 wrote:While likely none of us have seen raw climate data, we have seen the expert analysis of it.
Similarly I'm sure none of us have seen raw x-ray crystallography data of proteins, yet we accept a condensed statistical analysis of it from experts. I've accumulated and assessed reams of Fluorescence spectroscopy data and provided statistical analysis of it to make estimations of binding constants between a protein and a sugar. People did not need to look at my raw data to believe me. The raw data was available (as climate raw data is available) in the event someone wanted to try to replicate it or double check. This is no different.
If someone had a real, mathematically legitimate argument against existing climate models it would be more acceptable. But the arguments ive seen don't have that level of legitimacy.
A. You had me at "reams"...
B. It's not a matter of data that doesn't compute. It's that it appears to be driven from the governments teet. Follow the money as they so often say.
We all know that the earth is 4,000 years old.
Oh, sorry, I thought this was the Noah's Ark convention.
the earth is umpteen billion years old. Man is a blip in the timeline.
Recorded data goes back a mere fraction of a blip.
Yet, in the course of only the last 30 years the data showed conclusively (add quotation marks where applicable) that the earth was freezing. No, wait. It's heating up. No, wait again. It's changing.
And the kicker? It's man's fault.
But wait. There's more:
It's not our clearing of the rain forests. Or the way we farm or raise cattle. or the way we damn up rivers and build stagnant bodies of water, then pollute those bodies of water. Or the way we build on our ocean's edge and change errossion and tidal flow. or our ever expanding concrete urban jungles that absorb and radiate the day's sunshine all night long. Or even our nearly exponential growth in population (which impacts all of the above activities)
Nope.
It's because we burn fossil fuels.
Because that's the only damaging thing we do that can be taxed.
I mean FIXED. That can be fixed.
NASA data only recently fell into line with the Algore-ologists.
Hell, we don't even know if the raising CO2 levels are a result or a cause of rising temps.
But the worst part about this is when sh*t-for-brain sheeple insist the science is conclusive and can't be discussed.
Remember, 30 years ago the science told us we were going to freeze like Nanook from the North.
It was conclusive.
Except that it wasn't.