Our error margins are too big now to really weigh in on the precise amount of warming that’s going on in the ocean.
-Ralph Keeling, Climate Scientist

So an interesting article came out recently demonstrating that the hysterical findings of yet another climate change alarmist “study” were almost entirely discredited. Does any in the climate change alarmists camp care in the least? No, and that should be enough to put anyone with any common sense off of the climate change bandwagon totally.

If that’s not enough, there’s always the fact that American coastal cities like Tampa, Miami, Manhattan, Houston, and dozens of others were supposed to be under 10 to 30 feet of ocean water over five years ago are conspicuously not submerged. Even New Orleans, which has always been below sea level, isn’t a giant aquarium.

Oh, and the polar ice caps were supposed to be gone years ago. Remember that? That didn’t happen either. So, what exactly is useful about a scientific discipline, specifically climate science, that cannot accurately predict anything having to do with the very thing that its disciplined claims to be authoritative about, specifically the climate?

Not very useful at all, but, again, that won’t stop the hysterics in the climate change alarmist camp, because they are still convinced that the sky is going to fall because of a 0.1º Celsius increase in temperature per decade, despite there being no evidence that such a rate is either unprecedented in the history of the Earth, let alone significant.

We really muffed the error margins.
-Ralph Keeling, Climate Scientist

Let’s not forget that the same Chicken Littles who are now screaming that the 1998 to 2013 period constituting the “Global Warming Pause“, where global mean temperatures didn’t show any significant increase, should be dismissed as irrelevant, but the period of increases in global mean temperatures from 1979 to 1997 should matter.

What they don’t want to talk about, however, is the period from 1940 to 1978 where global mean temperatures temperatures decreased. Further, they really don’t want to talk about how data collection has changed in just the last 60 years. What we constitutes the “global mean temperatures” was basic thermometer readings until the 1970’s.

After the completion of the network of geostationary weather satellites over the course of the 1960’s and 1970’s, the sort of data that found its way into the global mean temperature changed dramatically. This doesn’t even touch on the point that many nations had only rudimentary meteorological data available.

The adoption of western interests in science and weather prediction, over the course of history, has been slow and followed patterns of European colonial power, so take the “global” aspect of global mean temperatures with a huge grain of salt, because there are still a vast majority of places where surface temperature isn’t especially detailed.

So can we finally take our foot off of the global warming alarmism pedal, at least for a while, and get back to the serious science? No, I don’t seriously expect climate change alarmists to do so, because some people are just psychologically predisposed to be emotionally hysterical, but it would still be nice.

---

Liberty is For The Win!