Bear in mind that the Church of Global Warming is currently in the process of renaming themselves to the Church of Global Climate Change, so that anything can be blamed on that miserable poison CO2. In any case, Russia could have used a little of the old church and China is battling the “coldest winter in 100 years.”
Lake Paliastomi froze over for the first time in 50 years and temperatures were set to drop as low as 67 F (55 C). As the article states, Georgia is a subtropical climate…
Of course the CGW or CGCC is going to say that one off incidents like these aren’t a data point against the global warming hype. Nevermind that the earth has always been going through an awful lot of climate change over the eons. Never mind that Earth was warming on average in the 19th and 20th centuries, before we started to pump CO2 into the atmosphere.
But anthropogenic global warming is a fact, because the CGW has a consensus, or so they say.
Pray tell, just what is consensus? It is popular opinion, not scientific fact. Science has held many such a consensus which was proven wrong in the end. What we need is hard data.
Proof to me that CO2 and climate have little to do with each other, comes from work from paleoclimatologists, who show us inconvenient facts, such as Carleton University Professor Tim Patterson’s testimony before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development in Canada. (See article.)
“There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth’s temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years.”
Or how about Catherine Brahic’s work in New Scientist (2007-05-17) where she showed in ice core samples the CO2 increase lags behind the temperature by roughly 800 years. Ergo, CO2 cannot possibly cause the temperature change. The same pattern, by studying ice core samples dating back 650,000 years, was confirmed by Holly Fretwell at the Property and Environment Research Center (PERC).
The fact of the mater is, that the IPCC is a political organization with a political agenda and though they claim to have a majority of climatologists behind their stance, more and more scientists who have never seen an oil company’s penny are coming out against their position, including some former members of the IPCC.
As for the IPCC itself, the truth came out recently about their position papers, especially the Fourth Assessment Report in 2007.
Even this “consensus” is looking weaker everyday.
Addendum 2008-02-11: Yet another article on a group of Canadian scientists who are convinced that the sun is the driving force in climate and are now seeking additional funding for better sun monitoring systems.
