Global warming
I am adding a section on global warming to my blog. Some
thoughts:
We now call global warming "climate change" and argue that
the record blizzards are part of the changes brought about by
AGW. It's unfair to attack the theory just because it changed
names. Really? As I recall, it was Al Gore that pushed the
term global warming and kept saying all the ice would melt. So
the real problem is the name chosen by the people who
promoted the idea of drowning polar bears and rising seas is
not sitting well with people buried under 10 feet of snow. So
now the name becomes "climate change" and anyone who
questions this is just stupid. Okay, maybe we didn't
understand the whole theory. But Al Gore did and he gave it
the name. So it seems that if Al Gore understood his "truth"
and named the theory incorrectly, it would be Al Gore with the
problem, not the citizens asking about the record blizzards. If
Al couldn't accurately name the theory, how do we know the
theory is correct. I mean, a name is a simple thing. Global
warming is complex. And all of that consensus? No one
renamed the theory before the blizzards????
There is a measurement issue with global warming. Recorded
temperatures are used for the last 100 or so years, tree rings
and ice cores prior to that. Any real scientist would tell you that
changing measuring instruments part way through is NOT
science. You use the same measuring device. Let's look at
an example of "mixed measurement". Say you are building a
house. One half the house will be built using a standard ruler
with 1/16 increments. The other half will be built by using 6
pieces of wood each one foot long for measurements. Does
anyone think the two sides will match? Would anyone like to
pay to prove that they would?
