>be faceless void >mfw I have no face
Ze double post:
Global warming, and for that matter, cooling, can't be proven or even considered for numerous reasons. The first is the difficulty in actually measuring the temperature of the earth. What do we measure? Air, water, earth? If air, what part of the atmosphere do we measure? Same with water and earth. In addition, the amount of weather stations over the past 100 years has grown enormously but originally there were very few, and they were largely focused on the Western countries. This means that we have more information in Europe and the USA, but little in Asia and Africa and Australia; to be accurate enough there needs to be a fairly large distribution of stations over each continent to be able to get useful data for global temperature measurements. If there were 5 stations in Africa at the year 1900, statistically you can give them a higher weight than the stations in Europe; however, individual chance of error is also much more problematic in the African stations. If just one of the stations in Africa is reading 5 degrees out then 20% of the Africa stations are 5 degrees out, which would be huge. Now, currently there are many more, and one would think that at least we have accurate data from the last, say, 30 years, right? Except in the USA, 92.1% of the surveyed stations have a greater than 1 degree error, 70.6% have a greater than 2 degrees error, and 6.2% have a greater than 5 degrees error. When people are trying to get information accurate to the tenth of a degree minimum, and only 7.9% of their data is likely to be near that accuracy, then it makes a mockery of any study amd tests done with that data! [Source:
http://www.surfacestations.org ]
Then we have the problem of Climategate and supposed scientists who twist data to meet their beliefs, rather than having the data define what they currently understand; especially with Harry's Readme file (very interedting read); these scientists take likely incorrect information, LOSE some of that information, half program a program to model what they think will happen, get Harry to finish it, and then he finds out that there is no documentation at all of what the program does. After 2 years of work trying to figure it out, his boss tells him to make a program which will generate a hockey stick graph no matter what you throw it out.
So we can't yet trust the data, we can't trust the major scientific bodies giving us reports based on that data, and even if they had accurate data we couldn't be sure of them. Now, I think it is certainly possible for humans to have an impact on the climate through pollution, CO2 emissions, etc. But currently we do not have the hard facts to prove anything about climate change other than it does change and humans may have an effect on it. Until we do, I see no reason to get all excited about carbon credits (now there's a laughable thing
) and doomsday scenarios.
Red classic.
"In short, their absurdities are so extreme that it is painful even to quote them."