Wednesday, June 8, 2016

The Strange Perspective of Climate 'Science'

Take a look at this graph of temperatures from 1900 to 1979.
Notice how temperatures fell from about 1944 to 1977? That caused climate science to proclaim the next ice age was imminent. Spend the next minute and a half listening to Leonard Nimoy narrate this gloom and doom announcement about climate change.

Of course, to the surprise of climate 'science,' temperatures turned upward. The famines of the 1960s and 1970s quickly ended due to longer growing seasons and humanity could prosper.

It was with the above in mind that I read this overwrought article at Mashable today about the supposedly low levels of Arctic ice this May. By coincidence, the ability of weather satellites to observe Arctic ice began in 1979, the same time everyone was concerned about too much ice.
Of course, the graph does not have zero at its base, so it visually exaggerates the amount of ice loss. Per the blue trend line, the amount of loss is about 10% -- hardly catastrophic when you realize the amount of ice at the beginning of the graph was deemed by climate science to be too much ice!

Hot, cold, ice, no ice, flood, drought, tornado, no tornado = catastrophic climate change to Big Climate.

Addition: 12:45pm CDT Thursday. Via email, I've gotten some feedback on this posting and I want you to really thinking about the point I am making:

Before 1979, we didn't know (we roughly estimated, but we didn't know) the extent or thickness of polar ice. Regardless, according to climate scientists at that time, the amount of ice we had in the late 1970's was so great that it threatened life on earth. So, we lose about 10% of the "too much" ice and now it is supposedly a big problem.

The point I am making is this: Science has no idea what amount of Arctic ice is ideal. Just like we do not know the optimum temperature of the earth.

Until we know those values, this is just a lot of alarmist hand waving.

No comments:

Post a Comment