Get our new Windows 7 eBook (PDF) for $7 with 70+ Tips. Download Now!
Apparent Problem With Global Warming Climate Models Resolved
- 5
- Add a Comment
Many scientists, including Allen and Sherwood, have long argued that temperature data were flawed for many reasons such as the change of instrument design over the years. “These systems were never designed for measuring climate change,” said Sherwood. However, some global warming skeptics had argued that weather balloon temperatures were accurate—and models that predicted global warming were wrong.
Apparent Problem With Global Warming Climate Models Resolved




5 Comments
Bob Littell
May 30th, 2008
at 10:03pm
This article is based on “research” measuring the wind speed near Hawaii. The reported results are so in errror that the reported numbers must be in error or the publication never read the article prior to publishing. They report that the global temperature has risen by 24.7 degrees celsius since 1970 (0.65/yr x 38yr). If so, there wouldn’t be any ice on the planet nor any humans (except for a few that dug underground with nuclear power, air conditioning, hydroponics, protein-growing bacteria)..
Don’t get yer innards in an uproar, laddie. Anyone — excluding yourself, perhaps — can make a mistake. Made one myself some time last month: thought I was wrong about something.
Jerry
May 31st, 2008
at 8:49am
It’s been amply pointed out that there have been several climate change scares over the past century, each one made into a sort of hysteria, sometimes predicting impending doom by heat, sometimes prediciting death by cold. But dendrochronologists (those who study tree rings) remain ever calm. The evidence is there in the tree rings, recorded forever and plainly visible for anyone to read, even a first-grader, that the world’s climate moves in broad cycles, up and down, this way and that, sometimes extremely, sometimes slightly. The present hysteria over the current warming trend has a particularly ominous threat within it. It has already been proposed at the UN, and viewed with favor, that a global tax be levied to pay for the effects of global warming. So pay your state tax, pay your federal tax, and then pay your global tax. Well I wasn’t born yesterday, and I recognize a pack of tricksters when I see them. This is globalism and elitism at its worst. Who, for instance, is going to collect the tax and disburse the revenue received? Someone who cares tenderly about me? I think rather it will be the same hegemonistic institutions and conglomerates that have been vacuuming up the wealth all along, only with a global tax they can really go whole-hog. No, no, we don’t subscribe to this, as our freezing cold Boston spring continues, I have counted exactly two days when the weather was warm and stable and the atmosphere calm. We are not believing much in global warming here, nor I think is there much meteorological reason to do so in the Northwest.
Have you read the entire IPCC report, or just the reviews by the naysayers? You can get it here: http://www.ipcc.ch/
Mike Cargal
June 1st, 2008
at 7:43am
the article says 0.65 degrees celsius per DECADE, not per year
paulidan
June 1st, 2008
at 2:47pm
Funny how those instrument errors trend almost exclusively to cooling…
Well, let’s all just put our feet up, relax, and have a big glass of Kool-Aid®.
Kiko
June 2nd, 2008
at 2:46pm
I must say that, apart from the carbon tax, which is just another ruling elite’s kick in the teeth to the honest, working man and woman, the current hysteria has something good going for it:
it’s pushing the environmental consciousness to the front page of every news and agenda.
Whether the warming trend turns out to be a dud or not, if thanks to it we end up less dependent on oil, with cleaner air and water, well… that has to be good ain’t it?
So let’s save momma-nature first, and we’ll take care of the illuminatti and their global taxes later