The UK Guardian praises Sceptics. What you say? I repeat, the UK Guardian praises Sceptics.
Scepticism is a healthy attitude to adopt to many, if not all, untested propositions. Sceptics throughout history, by applying their reasoned judgment and hard-headed critical faculties, have exposed lies, delusions and superstition.
Well, that's right. We have looked at the flawed hypothesis that man-made CO2 emissions are causing runaway global warming, picked at it, looked at both sides of the argument and found it wanting.
So, does the Guardian agree with us? No.
"Which is why scepticism is entirely the wrong word to apply to those who deny that emissions of carbon dioxide from human activity are leading to rises in average global temperatures, with potentially disastrous consequences. True sceptics respond to evidence."
Then the Guardian goes on to say:
"Research, led by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, drew on data from 11 possible indicators of climate and found that each one suggested warming consistent with expected effects of rising concentrations of greenhouse gases."
Call me a Sceptic and I may be wrong, but, reading the report three times through, I didn't see any mention of "rising concentrations of greenhouse gases." I did see mention of the el Nino/La Nina as a cause.
But CAN WE BELIEVE THE REPORT?
Well, if we look to both Jo Nova and the SPPI we find a different story.
Joanne Nova says: "As usual, the official taxpayer-funded report is full of half-truths and strawmen. Arctic sea ice is shrinking (no mention of the Antarctic), the world is undeniably warming (yes, so? what’s causing that warming?). There’s the compulsory allusions to “consensus” — 300 scientists, blah blah blah (trust us! we’re experts).
The interesting thing is that the seven different responses are all quite different, yet all skeptical, even though there was no coordination behind the scenes to create that. There are so many holes in the NOAA document, that seven commentators could fire ad lib, and for the most part, all find different targets."
From the SPPI report, we find:
Craig Idso: NOAA is rewriting history.... The Vikings were never forced out of Greenland due to the nasty cold spell called the Little Ice Age.
Dennis Ambler: Are sea-level rises accelerating? No sir.
David Evans: 250 years of warming but not so not much lately
Plus Lord Monckton, Joe D'Aleo and Chip Knappenberger.
So Guardian Editors, Seven critiques of the NOAA report. Seven examples of Reasond judgment and hard-headed critical faculties. And where did we come in?
Scepticism is a healthy attitude to adopt to many, if not all, untested propositions. Sceptics throughout history, by applying their reasoned judgment and hard-headed critical faculties, have exposed lies, delusions and superstition.
No comments:
Post a Comment