"CLIMATE CHANGE"
IS POLITICAL,
NOT SCIENTIFIC
Virtually all climate alarmism
true believers are socialists.
Most skeptics are not.
That strongly implies
the climate change issue
is political, not scientific.
"Climate change"
divides people
into those favoring
real science,
looking at present
and past climates,
using real data,
versus
those favoring
the junk science
of wild guessing
the future climate,
using data-free
computer games,
that always make
wrong predictions,
and when they
are not gaming,
they are very busy
"adjusting" historical
temperature data
to create more
global warming
out of thin air.
I've been a libertarian
since 1973, meaning
I think Democrats
are idiots,
and Republicans
are maniacs,
because
they both trust
the government,
and both want to
and both want to
expand its power.
They'll trick the
generally gullible public
to get the additional
government power
they always want,
from fake Iraqi weapons
of mass destruction, to
the fake climate change
crisis, "coming" since
the 1970s, but it
never arrives.
MARGINS OF ERROR ?
None of the global
average temperature
data sets allow
the calculation of
the margin of error
for the global average
temperature statistic.
That means
there's no way
to tell if a trend
in the global average
is inside, or outside,
the margin of error !
That's why you almost never
see margin of error boundaries
on temperature charts !
ONE CLIMATE MODEL,
MANY COMPUTER GAMES
There are about
70 computer games
making predictions
NOT close to the reality.
They are called
"climate models",
but they are only
failed prototypes
-- not real models
of the climate change,
that actually happens
on our planet.
They deserve
to be called
"computer games",
and their predictions
deserve to be called
"climate astrology".
There's only one model
in the whole world
-- one developed by
the Russians --
whose predictions
have resembled reality.
See the lowest thin gray line
on the "spaghetti chart"
of gray lines shown below
-- The (bottom) Russian model
is very similar to observations:
of gray lines shown below
-- The (bottom) Russian model
is very similar to observations:
That Russian model could be
a real climate model,
but probably is not.
A climate change physics model
must be be the foundation
of any global circulation model
used to predict the future climate.
But humans do not yet know
the exact causes of climate
change, other than having
a list "of the usual suspects".
Asserting that CO2 controls
the average temperature
does not create truth.
That would also contradict
what was discovered
in 800,000 years of ice core
data from Vostok, Antarctica,
where Temperature changes
happened BEFORE CO2 changes
Without definitive knowledge
of climate change physics,
the "right predictions"
from the Russian global
circulation model
MUST BE a lucky guess
( with so many climate models
developed, one of the many
was bound to look good,
even if for the wrong reasons. )
EVEN IF YOU BELIEVE
CO2 LEVELS CONTROL
THE GLOBAL AVERAGE
TEMPERATURE:
Some regions
of the globe
are cooling, and
others are warming.
Applying a
one-size-fits-all
solution to
all regions
of the globe
would make
no sense.