Link Dump

[melvin_udall]

Been holding some of these a while

I'm sure you've heard about the "WITCH HUNT WITCH HUNT" by Michelle Bachmann? Read the PDF of her fully footnoted letter and decide for yourself.
Keep in mind that Democrats are supposedly the friends of gays, yet the Muslim Brotherhood believes in killing them.

Lovely… Obama Administration Announces $20 Million

Comments

[melvin_udall]

Based on our best evidence of what might be causing this rise

Unfortunately, the "best evidence" has been, to date, pretty lousy. To my knowledge models are continually proven wrong, and few if any can accurately predict backward but are accepted going forward. Further, in a universe of unknown factors the best of us are working on a "science" that has been around for the tiny little blip that is a single lifetime. Hubris abounds.

the real concern is that it will continue higher than any natural cycle would take us, and this has implications for life forms adapted to our current climate - what has caused a cooling trend to suddenly reverse, and to do so as rapidly as it has?

But it appears to be of concern only because it's of concern. A cooling trend has reversed? OK. Let's take the enormous unproven leap and assume it's anthropogenic. So? The worst non-hysterical projections have said we're looking at 1-3°C in a CENTURY.
1) Has it cooled more than 1-3°C since the peak 2k ago? If so, why should anyone really care, except for some quasi-religious assumption it'll somehow brings us The Day After Tomorrow?
2) 100 years ago the horse was our main mode of transportation and most of the roads in the country were hardened mud - some doctors didn't know the importance of washing one's hands - the highest man had gone above the ground we walk on was easily measured in feet. If we can remove the parasitic cancer that is progressivism we'll be terraforming Mars in a century.

Implications? All change has implications. The question is if they are beneficial or not. (If I tried to argue with a Leftist using only the argument of nebulous "implications" they'd lose their shit). Implications in and of themselves mean nothing. To my knowledge studies are showing plants grow better and over a wider range. Sounds good to me. Grapes in England!

I say we spend a hundred years studying the implications. The alternative is that we spend trillions deliberately hamstringing ourselves in every aspect of society.

Dr Esper's tree ring data, while an important correction to our records, doesn't really address that question.

Wholeheartedly agree. I post it not because it addresses that question (that I don't think matters), but because these "important correction to our records", records that were considered sacrosanct-consensus-gospel, keep happening, yet all along we serfs were supposed to accept all the previous information and chosen courses of action as sacrosanct-consensus-gospel.

Any who do not accept the gospel are "deniers" (to the point of mocking, ostracism and even 'joke' videos about wishing us dead). Yet important massive corrections keep coming. Skepticism is supposed to guide science. It doesn't with climate change. Maybe instead of the deniers, heretics, blasphemers, the ones who should be most vigorously questioned are the believers. That's my point for posting these things.