Drop in world temperatures fuels global warming debateWhy do none of the climate models that the warmists are using account for the sun being a variable star? And why do none of the models predict with any accuracy events leading up to the present when fed 200 years of prime historical data? Posted by DaveH at August 21, 2009 3:33 PM | TrackBack
Has Earth's fever broken?
Official government measurements show that the world's temperature has cooled a bit since reaching its most recent peak in 1998.
That's given global warming skeptics new ammunition to attack the prevailing theory of climate change. The skeptics argue that the current stretch of slightly cooler temperatures means that costly measures to limit carbon dioxide emissions are ill-founded and unnecessary.
Proposals to combat global warming are "crazy" and will "destroy more than a million good American jobs and increase the average family's annual energy bill by at least $1,500 a year," the Heartland Institute, a conservative research organization based in Chicago, declared in full-page newspaper ads earlier this summer. "High levels of carbon dioxide actually benefit wildlife and human health," the ads asserted.
One thing I always thought contradicted the warming earth theory was in each day's TV weather report when the day's high would be compared with some historical high. If the "hockey stick" graph was correct, each record-breaking high temperature should have been breaking a record high temperature from a few years ago, not 1921 or 1889. When a stock price breaks out and begins a rise, each day's record high breaks the previous day's record high, or perhaps from a day or two earlier. To have comparable record highs from nearly every decade in the century and a half+ there are numeric temperature data recorded is to show the random nature of temperature, the opposite of a trend towards ecological armageddon that is the claim by the Leftists.
Posted by: Windy Wilson at August 21, 2009 4:38 PM