tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12339127.post8040078756575216517..comments2024-01-13T01:17:55.325-06:00Comments on Tom Nelson: Record cold hits South America; carbon dioxide blamedTomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08119241500221931600noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12339127.post-68506341863412472832010-08-03T16:07:38.673-05:002010-08-03T16:07:38.673-05:00Amazing how VangelV manages to mangle the science,...Amazing how VangelV manages to mangle the science, cherry-picking with abandon and misstating what is known about the climate system.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12339127.post-63368203460454804192010-07-28T14:07:26.931-05:002010-07-28T14:07:26.931-05:00Weather extremes were named by climate change scie...<b>Weather extremes were named by climate change scientists several years ago as one consequence of the build up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Even without scientific warnings, the rash of natural disasters and unusual weather patterns we've seen over the last few years would strike me as eerie.</b><br /><br />Eerie? What I find eerie is the lack of knowledge about the issues. CO2 emissions can't cause both warming and record cold temperatures at the same time because that is not how the mechanism is supposed to work. And the claims of extreme weather was false. Most of the models actually predict less severe events because the temperature differential between polar and equatorial regions would be reduced and it is this differential that drives weather phenomenon. <br /><br />The simple fact is that the world is no longer warming as it was when the PDO went into its positive phase. As Phil Jones admitted, there hasn't been statistically significant warming for 15 years even though emissions have been at record highs and CO2 concentrations have gone up. <br /><br />So what we have is a failure of the theory over the short term. Add to this the failure over longer periods and there isn't much to support the AGW myth. The ice core data showed that changes in CO2 levels follow changes in temperature trends, not the other way around. That means that the AGW proponents have mixed up cause with effect, hardly what credible scientists would do. The way I see it, the debate is about over and the AGW side has lost by refusing to discuss the issues, hide the data and methods that have created the alarmist conclusions, and pretend that cooling and warming are both caused by the same human activity. Time to move on.VangelVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18253765145016548748noreply@blogger.com