The information countering Climate Alarmism is now so overwelming that even the mainstream media is starting to report on the inconventient truth that despite the rise in co2 emissions global temperatures have remained stable for 16 years or more now. In a sane world this would be good news. People can stop feeling guilty about destroying the earth from fossil fuel co2 emmisons. No need to commit economic suicide in the name of saving the planet.So why are the Climate Change Gurus doubling down on direpredictions of Climate Catastrophy from hurricanes, drought, the sea rising to swallow up New York, etc.? Could it be it is all driven by the quest for power and wealth plus a good dose of fear and loathing of humanity? Do any of the Climate Change Guru’s leading this Apoclyptic End of the Word Quest for a “fossil free” world care that if they achieve their goals the planet will also be pretty people free as well? Or is a people free world the hidden agenda of the Climate Change Guru’s. Human’s are “killing” the earth and must be expunged in a slow moving genocide to “save the planet”. Denying people access to affordable and abundent energy from fossil fuel is just one way of driving more people into poverty and an early death. Sickos.
UPDATE: Nic Lewis left this interesting comment down below –
Actually, in Chapter 9 of AR4 WG1, dealing with observationally-constrained estimates of climate sensitivity, the IPCC only discuss medians and modes. Not a mean in sight! And it refers to the mode as the “best estimate”. Nor does Figure 9.20 (where the estimated PDFs for climate sensitivity from Forest 2006 and other studies are shown, labelled EQUILIBRIUM climate sensitivity) mark the means. And Forest 2006 itself only reported the mode.
So I’m not being either misleading on any count, or misrepresenting anything. But Dana is both misrepresenting my study and being misleading. What a surprise.
Skeptical Science has another silly post up which attempts to pick at the edges of Nic Lewis’s climate sensitivity paper. They titled the critique “Climate Sensitivity Single Study Syndrome, Nic Lewis Edition” We all know that Skeptical Science is filled with those who…
View original post 944 more words