Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 100% Wind By 2030
- It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- Climate Grifting Shutting Down
- Fundamental Pillars Of Democracy
- An Inconvenient Truth
- Antarctic Meltdown Update
- “Trump eyes major cuts to NOAA research”
- Data Made Simple II – Sneak Preview
- Attacks On Democracy
- Scientists Warn
- Upping The Ante
- Our New Leadership
- Grok Defines Fake News
- Arctic Meltdown Update
- The Savior Of Humanity
- President Trump Explains The Stock Market
- Net Zero In Europe
- The Canadian Hockey Stick
- Dogs Cause Hurricanes, Tornadoes And Droughts
- 50 Years Of Climate Devastation
- Climate Cycles
- Hiding The Decline
- Careful Research At BBC News
- New Video : Man Made Climate Emergency
- Geoengineering To Save The Planet
Recent Comments
- Gamecock on 100% Wind By 2030
- gordon vigurs on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- arn on 100% Wind By 2030
- gordon vigurs on 100% Wind By 2030
- arn on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- arn on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- dm on 100% Wind By 2030
- conrad ziefle on 100% Wind By 2030
- conrad ziefle on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
- conrad ziefle on It Is A Nice Idea, But ….
CSM : Study Links Global Warming To Snow, But Does Not Show A Link Between Global Warming And Snow
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
It’s a shame I’m not in a climate related field (or university course); I’d like to be funded to study something already well established in human knowledge.
I’m just perplexed that csmonitor consider this as being something new; it is basic high school science.
Here’s another funny quote from the article…….”In some ways, he suggests, the study’s main value may rest in the model shortcomings it may reveal – shortcomings “that may limit our current ability” to provide credible evidence of a link between global warming and the extreme rain and snowfall.”
Really?
An example of poor journalism……..”Either something is wrong with the models and they’re not getting the magnitude of the extremes observed,” Dr. Held says, identifying global warming as a culprit “may be suspect because something is going on” in the climate system that the models aren’t capturing.”
There is a word missing from that quote. Indeed, at the very minimum an entire clause. Is it wrong to hate warmistas that intentionally leave out information?
To answer my own question, “hate the sin, but” blather, bs, blather, bs, blather, “sinner”.
En la mañana.
This is what I call intelligent reporting…. for morons.
The study released after the fact to let you know they were smart enough to know ahead of time it could be caused by manmade global warming.
;O)
Huge surprise, wait for them to start denying they ever said CAGW will cause droughts.