Just Because A Good Chunk Of The IPCC Is Fake, That’s No Reason To Not Believe In AGW, Right?
I always enjoy watching climate alarmists jump on that ride at the amusement part, the one that spins you around and around and around, especially if it is the type where the bottom drops out. Now, in an article entitled Missteps By Climate Scientists Threatens Climate Change Agenda (which rather proves that it is all about something other than science), the AP shows just how obdurate and pig headed the True Believers are, instead of being broad minded and inquisitive, the optimal position for scientists.
After laying out all the issues involved with the UN IPCC report through the first six paragraphs, we are treated to
Climate researchers say the errors do not disprove the U.N. panel’s central conclusion: Climate change is happening, and humans are causing it. Some researchers said the U.N. panel’s attitude-appearing to promise that its results were infallible, and reacting slowly to evidence that they were not-could undermine the rest of its work.
Even Phil Jones has acknowledged that much of the data is bunk, that it was just as warm, if not warmer, during the Medieval Warm Period, and that there has been no statistical warming over the past 15 years. Something all the climate alarmist computer models said was impossible.
“What’s happened here is that there’s an industry of climate-change denialists who are trying to make it seem as though you can’t trust anything that is between the covers” of the panel’s report, said Jeffrey Kargel, a professor at the University of Arizona who studies glaciers. “It’s really heartbreaking to see this happen, and to see that the IPCC left themselves open” to being attacked.
Got that? It is the fault of people whose minds are open and are interested in the actual real data and real science who are at fault, but not the fault of those who are falsifying, spinning, alarming, and just making it up as they go, scientists who have enormous amounts of prestige, power, and money at stake for pushing man made global warming theories and scare-mongering.
“The underlying science is certainly there, but the citation process the IPCC went through is sloppy. There’s no other word for it,” said Doug Boucher, director of the Tropical Forest and Climate Initiative at the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Ah, the old “fake but accurate” argument. Makes one wonder when actual science will begin on the alarmist side.
People don’t like to talk about America’s culture for the same reason that a man who just had a heart attack doesn’t want to discuss the double bacon cheeseburger he’s...Read More
Via Ed Driscoll, who writes If NPR really believes that, it’s up to them to set an example for the
Uh oh, alarmists. What do you make of this? (via C3) The Hadley Climatic Research Unit (CRU) provides data to
Via a Memeorandum pull, the Guardian, along with many mouth breathing moonbats, are screaming about doom and gloom Greenland ice