Originally Posted by conachair
Looking at it a different way and starting from the very bottom- the heat content of the planet has increased extremely rapidly in the past 150 odd years, that isn't contentious. - why?
If that was true, why can't that heat be found?
From someone who puts it well (a scientist that can do statistics, unlike so many so called 'climate' scientists) :
"The DoomSayers Of Climate Change"
"As I've pointed out repeatedly in this column the so-called "predictions" of "Global Warming" have proved incorrect. This has not stopped the screaming, or the amount of money being forcibly removed from people at gunpoint to "give" to those who run this crap or profit from it, irrespective of the economic harm it does to the economy of the world
Reality is, that just like the so-called "lipid hypothesis" that has been roundly disproved in the medical
field, "global warming" is bunk. If CO2 is the cause of "global warming" and it's man's contribution to it (which is a low single-digit percentage of the total of CO2, by the way) then there are certain facts
that are very hard to reconcile.
Among them are the fact
that the upper atmosphere hasn't warmed to any material degree. Nor has the middle-atmosphere band that were told was where all the CO2 effects would concentrate and thus force the warming downward toward us.
Further, the ground datasets have been altered; the people doing it claim they have to adjust for "various factors", but if that data is inaccurate how about the satellite
observations of the upper
atmosphere, and the dropsonde and balloon observations of the middle layers? Neither of them show warming either, and the gap keeps widening -- which certainly looks like intentional tampering, doesn't it?
Next, if in fact the ocean is going to warm catastrophically and the atmosphere warming is the cause
then the upper
layers of the ocean must warm first. That's obvious. But.... they don't. In fact the oceanic warming that has been observed has been led from the deeper layers
, although the absolute rate of change is shockingly low -- about 1 degree in 400 years, which is hardly a disaster prognostication for the next half-century. Nonetheless the cause can't be atmospheric if the warming is originating in the deep, and it is.
It is not "science" to continue to claim that something that was projected to happen and then didn't
is still "inevitable" and "occurring." When your theory is disproved through the fullness of time science demands you modify or throw out your theory
That's what science is
Politics and theft, on the other hand, requires no science. It simply requires a gullible population that refuses to lock up the thieves.
Considering that the same sort of claims have been made for the "food pyramid" yet those "recommendations" kill millions in the US every year, not to mention causing a tremendous amount of damage to both health and finances of the common person
, is it any wonder that we find it in this area of so-called public policy as well?"
Karl has written very well on the subject for several years now (including analysing the computer code used by the University of East Anglia, and discovering the blatant fraud it contains, confirmed by visitors to his site that are professional coders), and continues to hit it out of the park.
There are a large number of people involved in this climate fraud (and theft of Public Money), that are deserving of very lengthy prison terms.
That doesn't include the penalties they deserve for the suffering and deaths they have caused to the sick and the elderly.