Study shows those who claimed climate debate over were wrong
The editors at Science must have serious indigestion with that one
Interesting read, thanks for sharing.
Those who wish to force the debate to be over are those who stand to gain the most financially and/or politically.
Despite the title of the opinion piece quoted, it is not a study. It is the opinion promoted by the Heritage Foundation. Nor is there anything new in that piece. It is just a retelling of all the talking points used by those skeptical of mainstream climate change. Of course the debate is never really “over”. That would be too broad a statement to make about any theory. There are always points that can be more accurately refined. Even the theory of gravity is open to modern refinement.
None of the predicted conclusions by the people espousing man made global warming took place.
They were wrong.
By the year 2000 we were supposed to be underwater.
They said that the science was over.
National Ocean Service NOAA has this:
Records and research show that sea level has been steadily rising at a rate of 0.04 to 0.1 inches per year since 1900. Since 1992, new methods of satellite altimetry (the measurement of elevation or altitude) indicate a rate of rise of 0.12 inches per year. This is a significantly larger rate than the sea-level rise averaged over the last several thousand years.
NOAA has been accused of changing data retroactively … going back and “revising” old data … to make the trends look like they support the theory.
The science is settled.
That’s the actual quote.
But that’s not correct.
You have effectively insulated yourself from any possible confirmation of predictions related to global warming by resorting to the “retroactively falsified data” ploy. But it this case, that is a really hard sell. The sea levels in the recent past are a matter of public record, as they have been measured and kept by a great many people - not just an elite group of corrupt scientists. For example:
I seriously doubt that anyone has the capability of covertly changing the tide gauge records maintained by every harbormaster. But do note how the IPCC projections, if anything, were too conservative, since the actual sea level rise as indicated by recent satellite measurements were at the upper range of the IPCC projections. There is one IPCC prediction that came true.
Another prediction that came true is the rise of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. Again, the actual CO2 concentration rose a little faster than predicted.
Another one is the retreat of glaciers.
The retreat of Pedersen Glacier in Alaska. Left: summer 1917. Right: summer 2005. Source: The Glacier Photograph Collection, National Snow and Ice Data Center/World Data Center for Glaciology.
Another one is actual temperature rise, as shown in the graph here.
Deepsixing another useful climate myth
Retreat of the glaciers.
But you are making it too easy to refute man-made climate change.
North America [the nothern part] was COMPLETELY covered with glaciers a mile thick.
And they are all gone.
They have been gone for many years.
But you know that.
Has the accusation been proven?
Just another opinion piece.
Still no acknowledgement that North America was covered a mile deep with glaciers that naturally melted.
But David Legates’ opinion is worth more than is the opinion of your average bear.
There are also 155 comments.
Legates works in this field; he’s what you call an expert.
Legates is just one man, and a tainted one at that:
Legates is a senior scientist of the Marshall Institute, a research fellow with the Independent Institute, and an adjunct scholar of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, all of which have received funding from ExxonMobil.. - Wikipedia article on Legates.
It’s proven that they revised the old data and the revisions support AGW models.
The motive is not proven though, which may be why they don’t want to release their emails