Envy is a terrible thing, but that is what I have…
Sometimes, I read a blog post and I think “I wish I could have written that” or, “You said what I am thinking” and today, I stumbled across a post on an unknown (to me) blog.
Sensible, balanced and objective global warming campaigner with nothing to gain
Regular readers will know that I am skeptic when it comes to AGW (Man-made global warming). I don’t doubt that the climate is changing but there is as yet no evidence that is concrete enough (with “tricking” or pasting, dodgy computer code or sleights of hand) to convince me that man is making such a huge and catastrophic change to the balance of the eco-system that we are with great rapidity going to crash and burn.
A dodgy graph yesterday
No evidence has been provided (that has not been funded by those with a vested interest in the outcome) to show that taxes implemented at ridiculous levels, that paying money to governments (or worse, a world governing body) who will only waste the money on ludicrous schemes will in some strange way save the planet from an unproved man-made catastrophe.
Nothing to gain from the myth…..honestly
Nothing has been proven to show that THIS alleged global warming that we are (supposedly) going through is:
- worse than any global historical climate changes
- happening at a faster pace than ever in the history of the world
- a direct result of what man is doing or has done
- not a result of factors such as Sun spots or other stellar activity
Anyway, I digress. I am a skeptic and, for those who would rather indulge in simple name-calling (yes, I’ve been called a “denier”, a “climate hooligan”!! and a philistine, Luddite and worse) then feel free. But the blog post I found explains it so much better than ever I could.
You can read the whole article here and I recommend it heartily but allow me to give you a few tasters of the quality of the writing…
as a computer programmer, I agree with Feynman’s philosophical position that you shouldn’t use computer models as a source of new information and I also take the practical position that even the world’s best software is buggy. I’ve not seen any evidence that climatologists’ software is orders of magnitude less buggy than, say, Excel. Two weeks ago, I saw evidence that it’s buggy as hell.
I object to the constant use of the word “denialist”, designed as it is to imply a parallel with AIDS denialists and Holocaust denialists. We never refer to Einstein as a “quantum mechanics denialist”, even though he didn’t accept the theory and the theory has been proven right to as great an extent as science ever is.
Regardless of the shenanigans to avoid acceding to the FOI requests, the very fact that they were needed in the first place is disturbing. And the insane quote from Phil Jones, “Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it” — what the hell?
I object to the way that the science has been inseparably attached to authoritarian politics. Herman Van Rompuy said the other day that “2009 is also the first year of global governance,” giving Copenhagen as an example of this.
I object to the apparent unfalsifiability of the argument. Every perceivedly unusual weather event is presented as evidence of AGW.
And yes, I object to the models’ failure to predict the recent total lack of warming.
Anyway, that’s enough – here read it yourself!
Other blogs worth reading for “deniers” (or those who doubt what Government, Big Business and some “Scientists” have to say)
Also, it seems to me that AGW is actually a construct on an inverted pyramid – there are a few bits of data, some models and some “peer reviewed” papers at the bottom and the whole edifice of AGW is teetering upon the this small collection of “evidence”…
Pax
