AGW believer's worst nightmare. That quote is correct.
KSflatlander's Link
The "how smart thing" gets old in the academic world, but it's how things have been done since academia started. The assumption is that the audience does not know why they should be listening, thus evidence is provided to validate that. It happens less it seems in professional conferences, more in "pop" stuff like the article KS posted or talks done to non scientists. It's hard wired into a lot of scientists. They function on following evidence, thus use it to describe themselves.
It always feels a little self serving to me, but I get it. It's also good to note that while the guy who wrote KS article is a "scientist", by providing that info he's admitting that he's not a climatologist for example. He's someone who understands related fields well, and who know's how to read, write and assess scientific studies. Helps understand where he's coming from when you read his article - whether you think AGW is hooey, spot on or a bit of both.
KSflatlander's Link
.. .. .. .
. .. .. . .
It was bad enough that you caused a mobilization of the Bigot Brigade this week, but NOW you got the AGW Weather Warriors all roiled up !!!!!!
How can you live with yourself ????
;^)
The climate is much different in the Midwest than what was experienced when growing up. I am a believer in climate change.
But, volcanic activity in the oceans, sun flares, solar system cycles yet not fully understood etc., would seem to have an exponentially greater impact on climate than human activities. Maybe that is more hope on my part, so I support further studies. Research fuels knowledge.
I do have concerns that money is playing a role in all of this. Also encouage a wiser use of our environmental resources. That is the direct result of growing up in Cleveland and witnessing the Cuyahoga River burn.
BTW, on the fishing thread, if it were not for Lake Erie being cleaned up, BB would not have caught those walleye. Very few back in my childhood.
I'd say the author in this case did have an axe, he is a researcher who just saw an epic fail, and was upset that people were using it to attempt to discredit a LOT of research. He got curious and investigated discovering his hunch was correct, and Monkton was not accurate. The #FakeNews here was Monkton.
I'll agree to disagree on the bigger picture of AGW.
If they are in fact multiplying the effect of just ONE factor, subtracting all other factors... that is manipulation of the facts to support the desired conclusion. That manipulation is also something several AGW researchers have been caught at not just once.... but multiple times. IMO that makes pretty much anything they say (that is NOT 100% open to peer review, like many refuse to do) very suspect.
They have had model after model fail, not just a bit off but epically fail...... so many times it's a joke. Yet NOW.....they tell us THIS TIME, they've nailed it.....
What is the issue with not checking into this? Trying to ignore it. What is the issue with ignoring so many other factors that very likely have a much greater influence on climate than carbon? (of which tons and tons of non-human caused gases and poisons are going into the atmosphere in fires across the country every day...... volcanoes pouring out sulfur, etc.)
There is an entire industry...... a quasi religion if you will.... all based on climate change being caused by mankind. Mankind bad. It HAS to be..... The guilt some feel for just existing.... as human, or white, or male, or American.... it's a mental illness...
