Climate Change Nonsense of the Week


Players in the climate change debate continue to makes fools of themselves and look desperate by taking any opportunity to blow up a story as evidence for or against man made climate change.

RealClimate uncovers the latest nonsense as several respected news sources described a recent paper on heating in arctic regions as ‘proof that global warming is occurring due to natural causes’. Maybe it is, but the paper in question did not describe it as such and merely commented on the accuracy of some aspects of existing models.

Will the media ever grow up and give the public proper and straight forward reporting on global warming? RealClimate sum up nicely:

The point is that this isn’t difficult stuff, and it should be standard practice to at least give a cursory look at what models actually show before accusing them of being misleading.

Information and Links

Join the fray by commenting, tracking what others have to say, or linking to it from your blog.


Other Posts
European Union Considers Green Import Taxes
Missing the Big Green Picture

Tags


Write a Comment

Take a moment to comment and tell us what you think. Some basic HTML is allowed for formatting.

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word

Reader Comments

This BS non-starter from Real Climate shows that the debate has deteriorated into a bunch of nit-picking commentaries about even the smallest non-relevant issues.

First neither article claims that this research paper is ‘proof that global warming is occurring due to natural causes’. They say that natural amplifications of Global Warming are the cause of the increased melting in the Arctic not observed in any predictions.

Neither does the paper, the real issue here is a statement in the conclusion. Which simply states that current models do not take into account this heat transport effect and the feedbacks for snow and ice may not be accurate as they are the primary feedback used, it also purposely states that this is not intentional.

There are two things that mean something here.

There is nothing wrong with the science or conclusions of this report ‘There is no issue with this paper that would merit a comment to Nature, let alone having Nature actually publish it.’- Gavin at Real Climate. Since the findings in this report are new, it is logical to extend the reasoning that the models do not account for it directly.

Gavin at Real Climate takes offense when anyone ever says anything about the GCMs, because that is his field and he is sensitive about them - ‘It just happens to be a pet peeve of mine’ - Gavin

http://www.zeniebottle.com/members/Treehugger/426/

look at this. very convincing and moving. Global warming is real and present