Last year there were at least 60 peer-reviewed papers published in scientific journals demonstrating that Today’s Warming Isn’t Global, Unprecedented, Or Remarkable.
.
Just within the last 5 months, 58 more papers and 80 new graphs have been published that continue to undermine the popularized conception of a slowly cooling Earth temperature history followed by a dramatic hockey-stick-shaped uptick, or an especially unusual global-scale warming during modern times.
.
Yes, some regions of the Earth have been warming in recent decades or at some point in the last 100 years. Some regions have been cooling for decades at a time. And many regions have shown no significant net changes or trends in either direction relative to the last few hundred to thousands of years.
.
Succinctly, then, scientists publishing in peer-reviewed journals have increasingly affirmed that there is nothing historically unprecedented or remarkable about today’s climate when viewed in the context of long-term natural variability.
- See more at: http://notrickszone.com/2017/05/29/80-g ... 7ijMe.dpuf
I don't think that anyone really denies climate change, that is just silly.
It seems the issue is simply not a very clear and decisive one as to what degree CO2 and humans effect the climate ( I personally believe that we do).
I think we need far clearer and better studies that do NOT require "massaging" of the data.
The predictive models are not very good ( understatement) and require even more "massaging".
Add to that the issue that we have no real solution that is viable and addresses China, India and the 3rd world and what we get is the need for A LOT more research and work and planning to be done.
First place, as redundantly expressed on this forum, the planet has long had cycles of extreme temperatures - and this has occurred many times and long before the industrial revolution. So, that tells us right away that any warming could be entirely natural. That also tells us that we can't know for certain if any warming since the industrial revolution is just part of one of those natural cycles - really, how are we going to know???!!! Again - several times in a row, just when I open my front door, my neighbor's dog immediately starts to bark (there are woods between our houses - he can't possibly see or hear me) - does that mean that opening my door caused him to bark? No! Does the correlation with warming prove man has caused the warming? How could we know? And now, magically, to those intent upon politicizing a science question and demonizing those who disagree with their "the sky is melting" hysteria, ANY years of significant cold or heat, snow in places very atypical for it, increased hurricanes or storms, it's "gotta be global warming!" I mean, you can fit whatever weather events to fit that narrative, if you so desire. What if a cold cycle period or "little ice age" begins? Does that negate the man-caused global warming theory? Maybe, maybe not. But how could we KNOW? We simply couldn't!
Secondly, if political globalists are given vast sums or even the ability to collect vast sums of money to supposedly put toward protecting the planet - everyone should realize that this could have very negative consequences. We all know of what poor stewards of money the great bureaucracy of government is. And that control of the money would be A) out of the hands of voters and into the hands of globalists we do not elect; B) If you don't think political games and pressures would come from the great power of those controlling that money, you're delusional. Political people tend to think per their agenda, and not per facts. So, these are serious issues. Giving such power, loosing economic resources over an unproven linkage - that's crazy. And particularly so, given how, as Paul said, that it's all based upon questionable computer modeling, in which minor tweaks of key data can produce very different scenarios.
Lastly, this is all very complicated. The foaming at the mouth types (Gore Inc.) and screaming lefties keen to demonize anyone who disagrees with their GW beliefs - they always fail to address to questions, insisting that man-made GW is a slam dunk - that not agreeing with it is akin to belief in a flat earth. These people are dangerous. Give their global leaders vast power and money - they become extremely dangerous. The other thing about such people - NO data or evidences inconvenient or inconsistent with their GW narrative and political agendas will ever change their minds, or even make them pause to question whether they could be wrong. These are very scary.
Right now, we don't know enough to follow the GW Chicken Littles. We SHOULD clean up our industries and air. Develop alternatives to dirty ones. But there must be a transition to get there. There are economics to be addressed, impacting millions. With countries like China building coal-fired plants as fast as they can - are THEY going to comply and reduce their outputs - or are they to stick to their political narrative - "It's all the West and countries of wealth that should bear the costs and make the changes to their own countries." Which tells me, until the third world and places in Asia begin to get serious about cleaning up their environments, all the GW taxes, etc. would be just one giant wealth transfer and empowerment of a dangerous, agenda-driven globalist class that won't do squat to help the planet's health.
