I‘ve been fiddling around with stuff, and came up with this. I don’t know whether it’ll be a regular deal, but for what it’s worth, here it is.
Hey! Nice punim!
(For those not in the know, “punim” is Hebrew for “face.”)
Good luck with the effort!
I have been a huge fan of tree ring data since I was a little kid!
Seriously though, the segment looked good. Thank you.
Generally I am not a fan of video reports. Preferring instead a written version that I can go back and forth on to clarify. However, this presentation was very well done and quite interesting. Thanks
Good presentation. You put a few different threads together that were otherwise going by like a blur.
Right now global temperatures are somewhere between the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period, both pre-industrial periods. So we have an upward trend in temperatures of about a degree or degree and a half F coming out of the Little Ice Age.
That’s the warming that has provoked all this hysteria. That trend was promoted as “unprecedented warming” when it was nothing of the kind. The science has also been jacked up to show a correlation with CO2, but climate is so much more complex than that, according to Lindzen and others, that the correlation is just that, a correlation, like the correlation between the popularity of the cigarette and the increase in longevity across the 20th Century. Correlations, you see, are everywhere.
An enterprising climate scientist could probably even make a case that human activity has suppressed the warming trend and prevented it from rising faster.
Looking at the Holocene, the inter-glacial period we are in now, which has lasted for the past 10,000 years or so, you see temperatures frequently higher, much higher, than they are now. The real threat to humans is cold and re-glaciation. If we don’t blow ourselves up or starve ourselves to death trying to be puritanical environmental religionists, humans will see that cold, sooner or later.
yeah, I think the main point is that temperature has been exaggerated to help create a sense of panic, especially data for the past decade or two. And also to reinforce the connection to Human activity.
I’m not so sure you can say the entire warming trend of the past 30 year time frame and the 200 year time frame have be made entirely out of whole cloth.
There hasn’t been any warming for the past decade. The warming that began in the 70s followed app. 30 years of slight cooling (hence the cooling scare of the mid-70s). The total warming for the 20th is about 1 degree F, if you accept the data as massaged by the CRU.
The phenomena attributed to warming, like the retreat of glaciers, is not anything to get hysterical about. Would we prefer advancing glaciers? Or just that they stop moving in either direction, as they always have?
Climate changes. That’s about the only answer there is to the question of “climate change.” It changes. The polar bear has adapted to all sorts of swings. The sabre-tooth tiger and wooly mamouth didn’t manage it.
It’s a rough world out there. And while the most dangerous species is homo sapiens, it’s not likely making that much of a difference in the Pacific decadal oscillation or in solar magnetic activity.
Well, won’t be long before a 10 year period of data is deemed inconclusive and you have to look at a 30 year time frame which I believe is about the length of the uptick in the hockey stick. They’ll find a way to dismiss it.
And if temps start rising again, they’ll just ignore it all together.
As for the past 10 years, I’ve seen them portray it as slight cooling to slight warming with a heavy emphasis put on the past year which was suppose to be warmer. Especially making the last year out to be warmer, someone’s turned up the temperature in the oven they cook this data in. By the time they’re done, there won’t be a record of a decline during the past 10 years.
Unless we have a spectacular abrupt temperature drop, don’t expect data to expose the AGW fraud. Firstly you’re counting on luck which is bad. It could go either way over the next decade. Secondly the people who are the keepers of the data will shake and bake the data anyway.
These people have to be exposed for their methods. They have to be caught red handed or exposed for having a bias which makes them impaired as scientists.
Good job Dale. I enjoyed this format quite a bit. As Tom Scott said, you pulled differing pieces of info together that may not be put together. That may be the way to go with this.
The only problem with this that I saw was a strange glare center shot, about an 1/8th of the way down.
The warming since 1850 has NOT been constant, it’s proceeded in fits and starts (the 1940-1980 range).
Not too bad, sir. Not too bad at all.
One bit in the way for suggestion: Maybe some foundation on yer head? Caught some nasty glare off yer dome, ol’ bean.
Yeah, Chris told me to powder down, but I just blew it off.
She is a wise woman, and one would think that by now you would know to listen to her more.
This new French carbon tax was scheduled to go into law on Jan1, 2010. The tax was steep: 17 euros per ton of carbon dioxide (USD $24.40). In a stunning move, and surely a blow to warmists everywhere, the tax has been found unconstitutional and thrown out. Originally found here (Google Translation).