25 November 2009


Suspicions about the validity of climate models appears well founded. As data manipulation seems to have occurred, here is a primer on recent occurrences on the issue.


A.J. said...

I think I have commented on similar things before, but here I go again ...

Although I think the blog you posted is a bit conspiracy theory for my liking, regardless of what the "real" (whatever that means) data / models may or may not say, I have always felt we need to do something about these emissions anyhow. It is just inefficient to let all that carbon (and various other emissions) out into the air. I would rather use it to make fuels, materials, etc., than waste it on emissions. And I feel cap-and-trade is a viable option to drive companies towards technology, innovation, and habit-changes that will get us there. Business as usual will not get it done.

Lowdogg said...

I agree completely about the need for good stewardship, but it should be based on real data, and you can make a good case for it without damaging or villifying business or ceding sovereignty to a supergovernmental organization like what is being proposed in Copenhagen.

I also tend to disbelieve the vast conspiracy theories in general, for most issues, but this demonstrates bad science at the very least, and seems also to be based on normal human motives to protect "your kingdom."