Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by IcyPatriot, Jul 26, 2014.
Over the 55-years from 1958 to 2012, climate models not only significantly over-predict observed warming in the tropical troposphere, but they represent it in a fundamentally different way than is observed. Models represent the interval as a smooth upward trend with no step-change. The observations, however, assign all the warming to a single step-change in the late 1970s coinciding with a known event (the Pacific Climate Shift), and identify no significant trend before or after. In my opinion the simplest and most likely interpretation of these results is that climate models, on average, fail to replicate whatever process yielded the step-change in the late 1970s and they significantly overstate the overall atmospheric response to rising CO2 levels.
For anyone that hasn't checked out climate audit I highly recommend it. The site is a bit technical but in a world of sound bites and talking points it's refreshing. It takes some time as it reviews (or audits) peer reviewed literature. Much is cut and dry, but the exceptionally poor quality of some papers is astonishing to those not familiar with peer review and how it can be a buddy system sometimes.
Steve Mcintyre, a Canadian statistician began asking questions about some dubious claims from global warming promoters in the early 2000's. Mind you, nobody really knew who he was for another 8 years or so. As the publishers of papers kept stonewalling him for data (required to be available at a public university) he wrote about it.
It all resulted in several peer reviewed papers by McIntyre that have dismantled much of the global warming case. His site is very much a factual account and not an opinion piece which has made him impossible to dismiss.
Read the Mann hockey stick peer reviewed paper by McIntyre and Mickitrick to see the heart of the debate.
It will take some time to understand the technicalities but once you do it will become clear that something of this poor of quality could not have shaped the debate without enjoying political support vastly exceeding scientific support.
We have discussed the curriculum vitae of Mr. Goddard before, Bachelor of Science in Geology and a Masters In Electrical Engineering
I will trust NASA more than an engineer..
Separate names with a comma.