@AndyC: Continual record breaking temparatures in isolated regions is normal. What we're talking about it an overall warming. Warming, not change, as again, change is normal. It is, after all, the only constant.
Which gets to the real discussion that should be taking place.
The only useful evidence is in the modelling. If both sides want to make a useful case, they'll both build their own predictive computer models and open source them for comparison. They must also reveal all their funding sources.
Everything else seems to be a distraction.
And a two-fer -
``The climate alarmists try to compare themselves to the legitimate scientists in various fields while the climate skeptics are being presented as counterparts of those who don't believe in the HIV-AIDS relationship and many other crazy things. However, they don't have any evidence whatsoever that these ad hominem attacks and comparisons are the right ones. They don't seem to care. They believe that the readers of the Wall Street Journal are gullible enough that they will just accept whatever is written in the daily.''
And they wonder why their credibility is eroding faster every day...
The punchline for tldrs -
An astrologer could tell you: "I am the only expert in astrology. I have been doing horoscopes for 40 years and earned millions of dollars by doing so. The astronomers and biologists who wrote an article that disagreed with me aren't really certified experts in astrology. You should better listen to astrologers when they're talking about the impact of planets and about the horoscopes; everyone else is a layman."
While an ML for the web would be my ultimate wish, Clojure may be a better fit due to the dynamic nature of the web. It's called ClojureScript and is being developed by Rich Hickey and others.
And you wonder why you only lose ground with rational skeptics...
Anywho, I think it's time to lock the thread as it has devolved into the AGW camp's typical bile-spitting. As objective observers know all-too-well, they only get worse from here. Otherwise, don't say I didn't warn you
@Dr Herbie: I never found China's claims about carbon reduction credible. If anything, I've figured that they are going along with it duplicitously to entice their Western competitors to continue cutting their own throats according to the treaties. All the while they continue to do things the "China way" behind the scenes.
And let's not forget all the other countries in Asia and around the world who are modernizing. I specifically mentioned more than just China. The West simply no longer has the stomach for competition (or the back, for that matter).
But, I suppose I should grab my tin-foil nightcap before I go off to bed. Fortunately I got it dirt-cheap since it was made in you-know-where.
The great thing is that no matter how many people are ideologically committed to stupid politics (such as current AGW policies), the world is not going to stop changing. Politics is just a tiny little flea on the back of human progress, and will ultimately not slow down the world's economic progress. If Westerners want to (continue to) cut their throats over ideological crusades, China, India, and others are more than happy to pick up the slack. Al Gore's feelings on carbon counts will be damned.
So at the end of the day, America and Europe have only one choice - get back on board the train of economic progress and abolish this environmental crap, or lose out to their hungrier competitors. World-wide carbon counts will increase all the same.
I, for one, am betting on China.
The West can enjoy biding its new-found downtime in bread lines
How to prove the world is flat, the AGW way -
- Grant researchers a billion dollars a year to 'study it'.
- Systematically deprive funding from the dissenting researchers.
- Receive an equivalent amount of evidence that the world is flat as there exists for AGW.
The effective government monopoly on climate science is such a compromising force that it's hard to believe there are those who deny its relevance.
But who could possibly oppose government funding of science? Oh my head is spinning! This is not what they taught me in the government's school system! I must contort my perceptions to stop from having to rethink everything!!!
Phew. Just in time. I wonder what's on TV?
It is not political to say that politics influence things. It is merely a sad fact of life, and must be accounted for. I think you're too quick to dismiss things that don't uphold your current beliefs. This is known as 'scientific bias'.
But anyways, here's just a tiny taste from a cursory search -
Politics is relevant as it provides the undercurrent to the discussion. It is in fact the main source of climate change funding. It seems the AGW camp would rather hide these realities away. Why?
Why is open discussion about funding sources so anathema in this particular debate? Why are skeptical and objective researchers made to feel like they're talking to the Spanish Inquisition? Whoever disagrees is sure to face demonization (being compared to a holocaust 'denialist'), personal attacks (being accused of dishonest intentions), and even threats of personal harm. This is anything but scientific.
I don't care what side of the debate you fall on, the chicanery at play should be painfully apparent. Science is all about method, and the AGW methods are politically compromised. Until we all accept this elephant is in the living room, the debate will almost certainly not move forward.