Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- NASA Sea Level
- “getting smaller”
- “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
- Rapidly Accelerating Sea Level Rise
- Technology Advances
- “The Hour Of Decision”
- “fair & equitable”
- Michael Mann Continues His War
- Time Travelling Satellites
- Time Traveling Satellites
- Adult Content On X
- The Climate Of 1923
- Arctic Report Card
- Green Colorado
- Hottest Summer Ever
- “Sea ice could be gone by 2012, scientists warn”
- Record CO2 Growth
- Walz’s For Trump
- 6,000 Year Old Tree In The Austrian Alps
- Gemini Can See The Future
- Clinton To Defeat Trump By Double Digits
- Climate Intelligence Means “Making Things Up”
- Comedy From The BBC
- The Climate Afterlife
- Rewriting The Northern Hemisphere
Recent Comments
- Scott Allen on “getting smaller”
- Greg in NZ on NASA Sea Level
- arn on “getting smaller”
- Gordon Vigurs on “fair & equitable”
- Gordon Vigurs on Michael Mann Continues His War
- Gordon Vigurs on Michael Mann Continues His War
- Bob G on “getting smaller”
- arn on “getting smaller”
- Hank Phillips on “getting smaller”
- Francis Barnett on “Permanent Shift” In Antarctic Sea Ice
“Verifying the major effects of greenhouse gas warming could take 10 to 20 years of observations, Hansen says.”
OK nothing unusual happened over the last 20+ years. We’ve seen a few mild positive benefits, nothing bad happened. Move along, nothing to worry about here. 😉
“,,, is a leading supporter of the climate models…”
“Though uncertainties remain, he says, they are unlikely to change his basic conclusion.”
Those statements alone should have warned us, and should have been sufficient to remove this ape from his position.
“…rising levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are responsible for global warming, and that is the basis of mathematical models being used…”
Ok it’s only a newspaper report, but that is exactly the issue with these models. “We assume CO2 is responsible for AGW and our models prove it — because our models assume CO2 is responsible for AGW”.
The relationships expressed in the models are specifically formulated to calculate a rise in temp with rising CO2. So, (and I’m sure this is your point also), the models cannot presume to prove anything about the veracity of the hypothesis – because they assume the hypothesis IS the cause of warming. They are literally designed to implicate CO2, and tuned to “fit” the other data, leaving out any parameters which might compete as the cause of warming.
I really think the models are the reason for the downward adjustment in old temp records. This adjustment wasn’t just for visual effect and record gerrymandering. It may well have specifically been done so the models could hindcast and forecast with the same algorithm.
“Common sense might suggest that rising levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses are responsible for global warming…”
Yes these rising levels of eeeevil gasses were so uncooperative at creating global warming the Team was compelled to change the name from global warming to climate change. Uncooperative to such a degree, common sense (for Gorebots unfamiliar with the concept, substitute PR or BS) among the Team now dictates reconstructing historical data to fulfill their prophecy of doom.
It must really suck to be Hansen.