Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Because I don't want to have to put any effort into looking into one of the pre-existing ones:

http://www.investors.com/politics/comme ... r-arrives/

That's a partisan piece.

There's a link in it that goes directly to the abstract. It's at https://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vao ... o2973.html.

Here's the thing, to me anyway: Climate scientist asked for the kind of derision you see in the partisan piece by failing to emphasize the uncertainty associated with what they are doing. If they had made REALLY sure all along to say, "Now, we can't conduct controlled experiments so there is inherent uncertainty here...." they wouldn't be vulnerable to having authors of pieces like the piece in question do what they do.

They could just say, "Ok, we knew all along that there's inherent limitations to this sort of thing because you can't conduct controlled experiments."

That sort of thing.

What the heck even though there were no responses this is a good place to post this:



It's what's believed about global temperatures over the past 570 million years. The explosion of multicellular life occurred during the Cambrian period.

As you can see the planet is cooler now than it has been during most of that time. Also you can see that it was MUCH warmer during most of the time during which large vertebrate animals moved about on land. If you consider that time to have been during the Carboniferous Period it was cool then but warm most of the time since.

Anyway it is NOT warm right now in the context of what it's been like during the existence of complex multicellular life on this planet and it will NOT be warm 100 years form now if the projections provided by the Climate Change models prove out.

We are in a cool period in the context of the history of complex life. And we're going to be in a cool period 100 years from now if the models are absolutely spot on.