Climate-changers busy twisting data
March 16, 2014 12:00 AM | 4241 views | 12 12 comments | 19 19 recommendations | email to a friend | print
DEAR EDITOR:

I always get a chuckle when reading an opinion column or guest letter written by an ardent global-warming alarmist who has obviously over-imbibed on the Al Gore “Kool-Aid.” One can count on two things each time — first that the “facts” will either be twisted or contain outright falsehoods, and secondly that anyone who disagrees with their position will be deemed an idiot. Ken Buxton’s March 12 letter to the MDJ did not disappoint me on either count (see poor Dr. Melvyn Fein).

Unfortunately for Mr. Buxton, the famous “97 percent consensus of climate scientists,” a report construed originally by John Cook, and upon which his main argument is based, has been debunked now for more than a year.

A slew of investigative journalists and other independent sources such as Popular Technology and Forbes all found the report flawed from a number of standpoints, including the questions asked, the misrepresentation of various papers’ findings, and not the least of which by adding the names of Nicola Scafetta, Nir Shaviv, and Alan Carlin, among others, to the list of the 97 percent in the survey agreement stating that humans are causing global warming. Those three noted scientists are in fact among the many leading denouncers of that theory.

Hey, come on, just the fanciful idea that 97 percent of any group could agree on one of the most controversial issues of our time should have been a red flag.

In response to Cook, 31,000 scientists have subscribed to the “Petition Project” which presents its own facts that there is no global warming occurring, human-caused or otherwise.

Any legitimate research today into the general subject of “Climate Change” interestingly reveals that there is a growing scientific movement contending that the change is actually global cooling. As far back as four years ago, a number of Russian scientists presented detailed research to that effect, and they have been joined in the last year by noted English, European, and even US colleagues. Just by using one’s own observations and common sense, one can reasonably conclude that theory is every bit as legitimate, if not even more so. The last four winters in the entire Northern hemisphere have gotten progressively longer and colder, while the summers have been cooler and wetter. (My heating and air-conditioning bills concur.)

The current snow pack in the U.S. and Canada remains at record levels with the start of spring just around the corner. The thickness of ice in the arctic is threatening both Eskimos and polar bears, who cannot locate seals.

In January, a large vessel was stuck in unusually heavy ice in Antarctica for weeks — in the very middle of the Southern hemisphere’s summer.

I must admit that I am not smart enough to know for sure if the climate is changing one way or other. I’m still trying to figure out what caused the five, six or seven Ice Ages that we learned about in Sister Joseph Gabriel’s grammar school geography class.

Even more confusing for me then and now is how the atmosphere heated up by over 20 degrees after each one — without a human being even on board. The good sister labeled those of us who dared pose that question as “mischief-makers.”

William Lewis

Marietta
Comments
(12)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
CobbCoGuy
|
March 17, 2014
Question, again, for our human-induced catastrophic global cooling, er, global warming, er, climate change, alarmists.

For the past decade, the five-year global mean temperature has not increased as expected notwithstanding the additional CO2 in the air.

Why did the climate models not predict this? Why was the climate change community taken by surprise?

Anyone?

I'll tell you why. All the factors and interactions and feedback loops are still not understood.

Judith Curry, Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences summed it up nicely. See LATimes, 09/22/13, "Global Warming 'hiatus' puts climate change scientists on the spot."

Curry: "All other things being equal, adding more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere will have a warming effect on the planet," Curry said. "However, ALL THINGS ARE NEVER EQUAL [emphasis added], and what we are seeing is natural climate variability dominating over human impact."
anonymous
|
March 18, 2014
Well, maybe so, but i feel warmer!
Bob Johnson
|
March 17, 2014
If you don't agree with him fine but why is it that if you Liberals don't have a good argument you start name calling. Let see now he is an "idiot","Tea party climate denying racist science denying". I still don't know how he became a racist while talking about the climate but that's how you people roll.
anonymous
|
March 19, 2014
Probably the same type of thinking that makes the right wing FOX-bots refer to the President as an Un-American, racist, Kenyan born Muslim with no birth certificate, or anyone who is poor as a dead beat, underachiever or moocher.
Ben Twomey
|
March 17, 2014
Same bunch of global warming alarmists throwing insults instead of facts.

Get over it. Gloabl warming is not happening at the rate you claim and it is not manmade.
on balance
|
March 18, 2014
Right!!
nurseryschoolscience
|
March 16, 2014
So you don't know and are willing to let civilization die so you can save a few cents on gas. I guess you will get a chuckle as you see the glaciers melt and the oceans rising. Have fun with your tea party climate denying racist science denying friends. Sadly, in Georgia you won't be alone.
anonymous
|
March 18, 2014
"Have fun with your tea party climate denying racist science denying friends."

So, the ultimate accusation --AGW deniers are racists? WOW! That's a stretch. Crawl back into your Mom's basement. Do not, I repeat, do NOT attempt to pretend you are open minded. You will expose yourself in minutes.
anonymous
|
March 16, 2014
What an idiot this guy is.
Kevin Foley
|
March 16, 2014
Mr. Lewis offers a well written argument apparently based entirely on a 2013 Forbes opinion piece by James Taylor of the Heartland Institute, which a Nature magazine editorial describes thusly:

"Despite criticizing climate scientists for being overconfident about their data, models and theories, the Heartland Institute proclaims a conspicuous confidence in single studies and grand interpretations....makes many bold assertions that are often questionable or misleading.... Many climate skeptics seem to review scientific data and studies not as scientists but as attorneys, magnifying doubts and treating incomplete explanations as falsehoods rather than signs of progress towards the truth. ... The Heartland Institute and its ilk are not trying to build a theory of anything. They have set the bar much lower, and are happy muddying the waters."

The Petition Project is likewise dubious. Anyone who calls himself a "scientist" can sign, i.e., doctors, mathematicians, sociologists like Mel Fein, computer scientists and so on. Asking a sociologist about the validity of global warming is like asking a climatologist about demographic trends in suburbia. Meaningless.

Scientific American took a random sample of 30 of the 1,400 signatories claiming to hold a Ph.D. in a climate-related science. Of the 26 we were able to identify in various databases, 11 said they still agreed with the petition—one was an active climate researcher, two others had relevant expertise, and eight signed based on an informal evaluation. Six said they would not sign the petition today, three did not remember any such petition, one had died, and five did not answer repeated messages. Crudely extrapolating, the petition supporters include a core of about 200 climate researchers; a respectable number, though rather a small fraction of the climatological community.”

damnage
|
March 16, 2014
"It's colder where I live, and my heat bill proves it, therefore global cooling is true, and global warming is not true." "Snowpack is at a record high this one year, therefore its high every year." "There was ice in Antarctica during it's summer, therefore global cooling." Lol.. That's some convincing evidence there bud.
bobdotbob
|
March 16, 2014
I always laugh as members of the Flat Earth society stand at the beach, look out at the horizon and ask, "Does that look round to you?"

*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides