Let me explain my thoughts on what is happening to the science of climate.
Climate science is built upon a couple of pillars that have gotten very shaky.
Pillar 1) Warming is bad for (there is a long list of whats effected here, but seldom shown is mankind), because mankind actually thrives during warming.
Pillar 2) Warming is 100% due to the Green House Effect (GHE) which is based upon a dominance by the Green House Gas (GHG), CO2, and that warming is unprecedented (fill in the time frame here.).
Pillar 3) Increases in Global Surface Average Temperatures are unprecedented.
We see this data and graphic ignored today, and instead often start with trending temps at ~1980, a VERY SHORT TIME FRAME. There is a very valid argument for using this start date, because that is the start of the satellite era where data from almost all of the planet using a single set of instruments became available. http://woodfortrees.org/graph/rss/plot/rss/trend
From the actual “Long Term” Holocene wide look at the data can we see this bump in the data? Nope! What is and has been happening is that the concentration on the very, very short term look has given us a false picture of that is happening in “long Term” Global Surface Average Temperatures.
Even when the alarmist begin to talk about “Long Term” they concentrate attention on the temperature measured record. But even this record barely registers on the Holocene long Global Surface Average Temperatures.
To be clear, except for the first graphic, the trends are from anomaly data, the difference from an average, which is used to calculate changes and show trends of that change.
What is clear from the Holocene Long graphic is that Increases in Global Surface Average Temperatures are NOT unprecedented for even this interglacial. The fact they may be unprecedented in the measured Global Surface Average Temperatures record doesn’t show us outside any norm. Plus, the highs within this interglacial were before man’s burning of fossil fuels had much of an effect.
“RICK BERMAN CHARGED WITH GROSS LIES AND DISTORTIONS”
No, that’s not a real headline in any newspaper, but it is no less real than the contents of an ad running on page A11 of today’s NY Times from the Employment Policies Institute, Rick Berman’s phony research non-profit. Which, by the way, earns Bermans & Co. a substantial income in fees charged to that entity.
The current propagandist ad in the Times is in the form of a memo addressed to Pres. Obama and basically (mis)informs him that of the hundreds of economists who have urged him to support the minimum wage legislation efforts there are several who have used the name Marx in some of their past writings. And, heaven help the man, one has even referred to Hugo Chavez as a great man. It’s obvious that the ad is intended to draw the reader’s attention to some “communist plot” to advance the legislation of an increased minimum wage. Most prominent is the web address of MinimumWage.com, another front organization set up by Rick Berman, where one can go to find (mis)information regarding the effects of raising the minimum wage.
Of course the NY Times is free to accept ads from where ever and from whom ever it chooses. The question is, why do the editors of the NY Times make no effort to disclose that the EPI is a front group which has no substantive research apparatus and is wholly controlled by the lobbyist, Rick Berman, who represents the low wage sector corporations in Washington?
Quick ACA update:
http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Research/ActuarialStudies/Downloads/ACA-Employer-Premium-Impact.pdf
Let me explain my thoughts on what is happening to the science of climate.
Climate science is built upon a couple of pillars that have gotten very shaky.
Pillar 1) Warming is bad for (there is a long list of whats effected here, but seldom shown is mankind), because mankind actually thrives during warming.
Pillar 2) Warming is 100% due to the Green House Effect (GHE) which is based upon a dominance by the Green House Gas (GHG), CO2, and that warming is unprecedented (fill in the time frame here.).
Pillar 3) Increases in Global Surface Average Temperatures are unprecedented.
Let’s start with Pillar 3. Most of this climate alarmism stemmed from looking at short term warming temp trends in the 80s. When we look at the whole Holocene as a time frame we see this trend: http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/graphs/lappi/gisp-last-10000-new.png
We see this data and graphic ignored today, and instead often start with trending temps at ~1980, a VERY SHORT TIME FRAME. There is a very valid argument for using this start date, because that is the start of the satellite era where data from almost all of the planet using a single set of instruments became available.
http://woodfortrees.org/graph/rss/plot/rss/trend
Concentrating on this very short time frame gives a completely different look at the Global Surface Average Temperatures:
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/plot/hadcrut4gl/trend/plot/none
From the actual “Long Term” Holocene wide look at the data can we see this bump in the data? Nope! What is and has been happening is that the concentration on the very, very short term look has given us a false picture of that is happening in “long Term” Global Surface Average Temperatures.
Even when the alarmist begin to talk about “Long Term” they concentrate attention on the temperature measured record. But even this record barely registers on the Holocene long Global Surface Average Temperatures.
To be clear, except for the first graphic, the trends are from anomaly data, the difference from an average, which is used to calculate changes and show trends of that change.
What is clear from the Holocene Long graphic is that Increases in Global Surface Average Temperatures are NOT unprecedented for even this interglacial. The fact they may be unprecedented in the measured Global Surface Average Temperatures record doesn’t show us outside any norm. Plus, the highs within this interglacial were before man’s burning of fossil fuels had much of an effect.
“RICK BERMAN CHARGED WITH GROSS LIES AND DISTORTIONS”
No, that’s not a real headline in any newspaper, but it is no less real than the contents of an ad running on page A11 of today’s NY Times from the Employment Policies Institute, Rick Berman’s phony research non-profit. Which, by the way, earns Bermans & Co. a substantial income in fees charged to that entity.
The current propagandist ad in the Times is in the form of a memo addressed to Pres. Obama and basically (mis)informs him that of the hundreds of economists who have urged him to support the minimum wage legislation efforts there are several who have used the name Marx in some of their past writings. And, heaven help the man, one has even referred to Hugo Chavez as a great man. It’s obvious that the ad is intended to draw the reader’s attention to some “communist plot” to advance the legislation of an increased minimum wage. Most prominent is the web address of MinimumWage.com, another front organization set up by Rick Berman, where one can go to find (mis)information regarding the effects of raising the minimum wage.
Of course the NY Times is free to accept ads from where ever and from whom ever it chooses. The question is, why do the editors of the NY Times make no effort to disclose that the EPI is a front group which has no substantive research apparatus and is wholly controlled by the lobbyist, Rick Berman, who represents the low wage sector corporations in Washington?