“I should have been an engineer,” climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer laments. “I went into science with the misguided belief that science provides answers. Too often, it doesn’t. Some physical problems are simply too difficult. Two scientists can examine the same data and come to exactly opposite conclusions about causation.”
In other words, it’s like all sciences of complex phenomena. Like social science — economics, for instance.
But he’s not complaining that it’s hard. He’s complaining that it’s been taken over.
By ideologues.
When it comes to “climate change,” scientific nuance is gone:
We still don’t understand what causes natural climate change to occur, so we simply assume it doesn’t exist. This despite abundant evidence that it was just as warm 1,000 and 2,000 years ago as it is today. Forty years ago, “climate change” necessarily implied natural causation; now it only implies human causation.
This unscientific leap to the now-de rigueur “anthropogenic” conclusion depresses him.
Understandably. Take the latest news pitch, the NOAA and NASA reports that last year, 2014, stands as “the hottest on human record.”
No, it isn’t, Spencer says.
Such claims are based on compromised data that most respectable climate scientists now avoid: surface temperature recordings, not satellite data. Such “hottest ever” reports “feed the insatiable appetite the public has for definitive, alarming headlines. It doesn’t matter that even in the thermometer record, 2014 wasn’t the warmest within the margin of error.”
But journalists, often moonlighting as lazy political activists, “went into journalism so they wouldn’t have to deal with such technical mumbo-jumbo” as “margins of error.”
And politicians are worse.
I guess that leaves the job of common-sense skeptic to you and me.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
8 replies on “Hot or Not”
Just more of your BULL SHIT. You must think the world is only 6,000 years old like other IDIOTS.
There is a difference between observing and understanding, hypotheses and knowledge, theory and cause.
Agendas mixed with science have always been an issue. Remember Copernicus.
JATR4
Your debate,research presentation, tactics and manners need polishing.
Sort of reminds me of a two year year old I heard the other day who thought it was funny to call every one a “poo poo head” Civilized people realize the child is only two and teach them there are better ways to communicate.
Any more deep and profoundly intelligent comments from JATR4? No? I’ll bet you also believe, like Paul R. Ehrlich, in the “Population Bomb”, right? He is of the same political ilk as the global warming scammers. His book is another complete scam when you learn that you can stand every living soul shoulder to shoulder on the island of Maui. Don’t believe all that you hear from poli-scientists, JATR4, you will be proven wrong 98% of the time. Get in the car and drive cross country of the United States and drink in the REALITY of the vastness of our world. Then come back and tell me that WE are responsible for the fluctuation of year to year temperatures. What happened to ALL that oil in the Gulf, by the way? Learn to recognize scams when you see them! Think! For once.
I see you can’t debate the issue. This is a prime example of how the left “argues”. Don’t agree with them, you’re “stupid” or a “racist” (or worse, judging by the above classy language!). Saul Alinsky is alive and well in you, JART4. Maybe you would be happier reading other blogs? I totally agree and encourage the pursuit of happiness. So, go forth and find yours!
It sounds like JATR4 needs a time-out.
Timeout from IDIOTS like you.
For the very first time in 15 years, I deleted several comments made today (by JATR4). It pains me to do so, but we do not tolerate name-caling and foul language.
There is no place for that sort of behavior. None.