A real scientist is:
-- always skeptical,
-- welcomes debate,
-- bases conclusions on unbiased data,
-- shares his data with other scientists,
-- states reasonable margins of error,
-- states conclusions that can be 'falsified',
-- doesn't expect only like-minded peer reviewers, and
-- doesn't waste time playing computer games and making wild guesses about the future.
Government bureaucrat climate modelers
do none of the things that scientists do!
Government bureaucrat climate modelers are part of the CO2 is Evil Cult.
The CO2 is Evil Climate Cult believes in a coming climate catastrophe caused by man made carbon dioxide -- runaway warming -- that will eventually kill all life on earth.
Cultists rarely say that directly:
-- they talk about "climate change",
-- they make vague references about a coming climate crisis with no specific date, and
-- they recently began claiming after +2 degrees C. of global warming, the climate crisis could not be stopped.
Climate Cult claims are complete nonsense -- that's why I started writing this blog a few years ago.
Our planet is currently near its lowest CO2 level ever, at 400 ppm, according to geologists who estimate a range from about 200 parts per million (ppm) to 8,000 ppm.
There has never been runaway warming from past CO2 levels up to 20 times higher than today!
The "C3" green plants that people and animals eat evolved when CO2 levels averaged about 1,000 ppm.
Green plants used for food, and our planet, would benefit from a return to 1,000 ppm.
CO2 is not evil -- it is the staff of life on our planet.
The current level of CO2 is too low!
The Climate Cult operates like a secular religion, based on faith, similar to traditional religions in many ways.
Like any other religion, some members have science degrees.
But having a science degree doesn't mean a person's work is real science.
The Climate Cult has only one connection with real science -- some simple lab experiments with CO2 in a closed system.
These experiments suggest a doubling of airborne CO2 would increase the average temperature by a harmless +1 degree C., over a very long period of time.
Every other prediction about the future climate is wild guess speculation -- mainly climate catastrophe fairy tales -- based on no science at all.
The future climate is unknown, and unknowable -- it will either be warmer or colder -- no one knows the future climate today.
I'd prefer a warmer climate in the future, so maybe you could say I'm biased in favor of global warming, or at least Michigan warming, to be more specific.
The Climate Cult never mentions a doubling of current CO2 levels would take 200 years at the recent average increase of +2 ppm per year.
CO2 doubling would take 133 years with a +3 ppm increase per year.
200 years, or 133 years, assumes we are still burning fossil fuels in the 22nd century, which seems unlikely!
The Climate Cult never mentions CO2 is invisible to sunlight, so the "greenhouse effect" has little effect on maximum daytime temperatures.
The "greenhouse effect" is slightly slower cooling at night, increasing the nighttime low temperature.
The use of daily AVERAGE temperatures hides this fact.
The "greenhouse effect" is also weakest in the humid tropics -- that's good news, because warmer nights may not be welcome there.
The "greenhouse effect" is strongest in cold, dry areas -- that's good news too, because warmer nights are likely to be welcome there.
Any climate change claims, other than slight, gradual night time warming in the next 100 to 200 years, are wild guess speculations.
I suppose you are thinking:
"There are government scientists involved, so the coming global warming catastrophe must be based on real science?"
The alleged coming climate catastrophe is not based on any science.
The Climate Cult leaders are actually leftist politicians, not scientists.
Leftist politicians never mention they like having a "crisis" to "fight".
For them, every "crisis" is an opportunity to expand government powers.
That's why leftist politicians only hire scientists who believe in, and are willing to predict, a coming climate crisis.
The use of climate computer models to wild guess the future climate is not real science.
First of all, computer models are not real data.
In fact, computer models are nothing more than the personal opinions of the climate modelers who write the programs.
Their personal opinions are disguised to look like real science, by the use of complex math, in complex computer programs.
.
Their predictions, for 30 years so far, are always for a "climate catastrophe" far off in the future, with no specific date, not even the century!
Their imaginary climate catastrophe is always so far off in the future that their predictions can never be proven wrong in the span of a human lifetime.
An imaginary climate catastrophe is always "coming", but never comes!
We have been listening to various fairy tales of a coming environmental catastrophe for more than 50 years:
DDT,
acid rain,
hole in the ozone layer,
global cooling,
and now global warming.
The first four "crises" are now ignored because they stopped scaring people!
Global warming should stop scaring people too.
The average temperature today is wonderful -- slightly warmer at night than in the late 1800s.
The climate has been getting better for hundreds of years !
It doesn't matter to leftist politicians if the "coming climate crisis" is real, or fake.
A fake climate crisis is just as good as a real crisis, as long as lots of people believe the crisis is coming.
The government bureaucrats with science degrees were hired to play computer games, and make scary, wrong climate predictions.
That's why we've heard scary, wrong climate predictions for the past 30 years.
Scary, wrong climate predictions are NOT real science.
I happen to have a BS science degree.
I try to include real science in this blog -- not wild guess predictions of an imaginary future climate catastrophe.
There is more real science reported in this blog
than we get from our:
-- taxpayer funded,
-- computer game playing,
-- smarmy government bureaucrats,
-- who repeatedly "adjust" historical temperature data to show more warming, and
-- conveniently lose, or refuse to share, their original raw historical temperature data!
Those government bureaucrats happen to have science degrees, but they give real science a bad reputation.
After 20 years of reading about climate change, and writing this blog for a few years, I have the following logical climate beliefs:
(1) A climate modeler is not a real scientist, because he has no idea what causes climate change, yet builds a climate model, implying that he does know.
30 years of grossly inaccurate climate predictions from those failed models prove CO2 levels do not control the average temperature, except in the climate models !
(2) Wild guesses of the future climate are not real science, especially wrong guesses that the rate of global warming was going to be triple the actual rate !
(3) Having a science degree does not mean anything you work on is real science !