This letter suggests that the UN reconsider its approach to climate change. After all, the climate has been changing as long as there is any evidence to study about earth temperature. In 1200, Greenland supported farming and a population of 5,000 people. With the onset of The Little Ice Age (Note that Wikipedia is not reliable here for reasons previously explained. They even still have the “hockey stick.”), the Norse population died out and was replaced by Inuits who arrived about 1200 AD and remain the Greenland population. They were better able to tolerate the Arctic conditions that followed.
The Bush Administration seems to have given up on this subject, seemingly planning to run out the clock, and McCain may be too willing to be influenced by the climate-politicians. We’ll see.
Tags: climate, global warming, Greenland, Ice Age
Dr. K. Hey, the debate is over. Didn’t a Nobel Prize winner say so?
On the other hand….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-rays
And then there is Summerlin….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Summerlin
Time will tell. Facts don’t care about fashion, let alone politics.
I should be a bit clearer, Dr. K. The “N-rays” business started out as experimenter bias—what the investigators *wanted* to be true. That is a true danger in science, and I suspect a lot of that is going on in climate studies right now. There is a paradigm that is accepted. “The debate is over,” etc.
Summerlin, on the other hand, full out falsified data. I liken it to the more recent Mark Spector story (out of the late Ephraim Racker’s lab at Cornell):
http://books.google.com/books?id=EzcRY5jxNqsC&pg=PA35&lpg=PA35&dq=%22Mark+Spector%22+fraud&source=web&ots=kiLVfvQtz4&sig=eqUjhBhm6f46ZHZ7d2uIssw-iT4&hl=en
I hope that link works; it takes you to Racker’s explanation of Spector’s business in his laboratory. It leaves out the fact that Racker was famous for *not* supervising his students closely. Does that mean it was Racker’s fault? Not at all. But it does mean that “big science” doesn’t watch things carefully, and is based on the presumption of honesty.
Which brings me to Hansen and climatology.
Both Summerlin and Spector full out made things *look* like the hypothesis was correct, their theories true.
And I fully believe that Hansen is stuck in his AGW mode, and is intentionally obscuring data that doesn’t agree with his conclusions. Check out:
http://www.climateaudit.org/
and
http://www.coyoteblog.com
I think that this is all much more politics than it is climate studies. But then, the debate is over, and people who disagree or question the model are the same as Holocaust Deniers, right?
Sigh.
Bjorn Lomborg is now advising McCain so maybe we will see some sensible recommendations.
omg.. good work, dude