Global Warming is Irreversible – We are so going to die

by Terry 1/27/2009 4:27:00 PM

Wow. It is official. Our society is doomed to collapse in an overheated dustbowl, no matter what we do. The only solution is to throw more resources at stopping the inevitable.

“I guess if it's irreversible, to me it seems all the more reason you might want to do something about it”
- Susan Solomon, ‘who is among the world's top climate scientists’

Actually, what really scares me is the stupidity of this and other recent news releases. This is more truth by repeated assertion than science. Science proposes theories based on observable facts and repeatable experiments. News agencies, no longer journalists I think, have apparently lost the ability to fact check, or differ between a statement of opinion and verified data reality.

For example, New data show much of Antarctica is warming more than previously thought.

Which is refuted here in Antarctica warming? An evolution of viewpoint and Despite the hot air, the Antarctic is not warming up.

The common thread in the initial statements of impending disaster is the underlying theories are presented as unalterable truths when they are really weak theories bases on unverifiable models using admittedly manufactured data. This is not science but a show – shriek for more funding.

Frankly, I could care less if there is global warming or cooling, although I would prefer warming, as it is easier to grow food in a desert than on a glacier. What I do care about is the shrieking call to Do Something, particularly when the something to do is not defined, or is wrapped in vague statements.

We must reduce carbon! Ok, by how much and in what form? How do you know this? Can you account for natural variation? How do you know you have? How do your models change with different assumptions? How do you know your assumptions are correct? What is your margin of error?

In 1999 I was asked to evaluate the compliance with ‘Year 2000’ computing requirements with the company I worked for. I was creating a legal document to verify our company had done its darned best to thwart the specter of a Y2K disaster. My evaluation of the data showed a 60% margin of error. That is, we were likely as bare naked as we were dressed for success. My employer said to me, in no uncertain terms, that I will show that the company is 90% compliant. Sure. That is easy. I will tell the truth. And I told my boss as much, to her great displeasure. My final document said the company was possibly 90% compliant. It also said very clearly that errors were so large we may only be 30% compliant, we may know with greater certainty in January of 2000 and the only way to actually know was to reduce uncertainty.

What is missing from our ‘top scientists’ are actual statements on what is fact and what is fiction. By fiction, I mean what are assumptions and not real data. What our top scientists need to start saying and our news agencies need to start reporting are the truths about the weakness of a reported theory and what in the theory is falsifiable. We need to stop believing in truth because someone said it is so. Maybe I should say this more often.

Currently rated 1.0 by 1 people

  • Currently 1/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Tags:

Climate Change | Personal | Policy

Powered by BlogEngine.NET 1.4.5.0
Theme by Mads Kristensen

About Terry Losansky

Terry Dee Losansky

I am a software architect, actively practice and teach martial arts and live in Snoqualmie, Washington. I have an amazing daughter who is the jewel of my life.

E-mail me Send mail
Terry's Facebook profile

Calendar

<<  November 2017  >>
MoTuWeThFrSaSu
303112345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930123
45678910

View posts in large calendar

Recent comments

Authors

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in anyway.

© Copyright 2017

Sign in