Fraudulent Climate Modeling and all of its resultant media driven Climate Change Hysteria is without a doubt the greatest scandal in the history of science.
In this debate, there are two types of evidence. The first is the raw material of science, observation. The second is Climate Models created by alarmists for the purpose of generating scary scenarios. Anyone with the slightest acquaintance with science understands that observation (type 1) trumps theory (type2). Which is a serious problem for the left-wing warmists, since temperature records show that their models are wrong: Is the Earth’s Climate History Largely a Fraud? | Power Line
Related Articles
Remember that a recent peer-reviewed study seems to prove that nearly all “global warming” is really caused by climate researchers manipulating the data.
They’re not done yet. Recently we found out that the scientists in charge of the climate satellite data produced by Remote Sensing Services (RSS) in California have decided to adjust the raw satellite data from the year 2000 to the present in order to show a warming trend where there isn’t any actual warming.
Why would they do this? Simple, because the climate models are engineered to generate hysteria and government grants, and whether they are wrong or not is merely a secondary consideration.
Observation usually trumps theory, so the climate hucksters need to gaslight the public. Otherwise who are you going to believe, Climate experts or your lying eyes?
Update .. Ace of Spades HQ adds this amusing nugget: Oh My: Climate Scientists Admit Past “Models” Were Wrong, Admit That the Rapid Warming Predicted by Models Hasn’t Been Seen, and Revise the Schedule for the Apocalypse to Put It Off for 20 Years
Defining doomsday down.
The National Laughingstock (the SJWashingon Post) sheepishly confesses:
The new research, thus, seems to potentially empower a critique of climate science that has often been leveled by skeptics, doubters and “lukewarmers” who argue that warming is shaping up to be less than climate models have predicted…Overall, the dispute raises questions about how widely the carbon-budget concept has proliferated — and just how much we actually understand it.
“It goes to show, this carbon-budget approach is still much more, let’s say, immature scientifically than what we often assume,” [Center for International Climate Research’s Glen] Peters said.
Let’s never forget this photo from 2015 which was called the “Warmest Year On Record” by these same “Climate Scientists”.
Read more about the latest “Climate Scientist” hedging of their bets here: Emission budgets and pathways consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 °C (I put “Climate Scientist” in scare quotes because real scientists wouldn’t generally fudge observational data).
