Each day we overwhelm your brains with the content you've come to love from the Louder with Crowder Dot Com website.
But Facebook is...you know, Facebook. Their algorithm hides our ranting and raving as best it can. The best way to stick it to Zuckerface?
Sign up for the LWC News Blast! Get your favorite right-wing commentary delivered directly to your inbox!
Climate Models Used for Last Six Decades Definitively Proven False...
Exaggerated climate science isn't newsy (see MYTH BUSTED: Climate Change “Consensus of Scientists” Is A Lie and Ted Cruz Delivers Best Performance Yet at Climate Change Hearing). But when the climate models are now definitively proven to have been wrong for over sixty years, at least according to a new report, that's kinda newsy...
Climate models used by scientists to predict how much human activities will warm the planet have been over-predicting global warming for the last six decades, according to a recent working paper by climate scientists.
“Everyone by now is familiar with the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in the rate of global warming that has taken place over the past 20 years of so, but few realize is that the observed warming rate has been beneath the model mean expectation for periods extending back to the mid-20th century—60+ years,” Patrick Michaels and Chip Knappenberger, climate scientists at the libertarian Cato Institute, write in a working paper released in December.
Well, well, well. One can only imagine the reaction from leftists who've received billions in government grants based on the lie.
Now I know, I know. We'll just be ridiculed as "science deniers" (by the same people who believe that sex and gender are interchangeable). So I understand that this may be an exercise in futility, but I'm going to give it the old college try.
There's a difference between anecdotal evidence and empirical evidence. With
global warming climate change, we now have both. First, the anecdotal. We've covered how the famous, oft-cited scientist, predicted that the icecaps would melt by 2013. When that didn't happen, he changed it to 2016. Read it here, but some quotes:
"Their latest modeling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years (2013)."
Then changed to...
“Given the estimated trend and the volume estimate for October–November of 2007 at less than 9,000 km3, one can project that at this rate it would take only 9 more years or until 2016 ± 3 years to reach a nearly ice-free Arctic Ocean in summer. Regardless of high uncertainty associated with such an estimate, it does provide a lower bound of the time range for projections of seasonal sea ice cover.”
So that was kind of a big deal, considering that billions of dollars had been forked over for research based on these predictions. After that, we had NASA releasing reports that the Antarctic Ice Sheet is in fact growing at an incredible rate, contrary to the predictions of "shrinkage" that had been previously accepted. Excerpt below.
A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.
The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.
According to the new analysis of satellite data, the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001.
Still, to some people, that merely provided temporary observances. Fine, we'll allow it. But now, with this report, there can be no doubt that over the last six decades, the climate models we've been using are entirely wrong. This is coming to us from qualified CLIMATE SCIENTISTS, which is important to note, because it also serves to debunk the myth of "scientific consensus" regarding
global warming climate change.
So at this point, you may believe in the
global warming climate change religion, and that's your right. But from the perspective of observable science, to claim that global warming climate change is an undeniable, imminent threat, is no longer a tenable position. So what do you think that does to the dogmatic movement as a whole?