Creating Facts from Fiction
“…only a very small fraction of published studies actually involved research into how much of recent warming has been due to human activities. Instead, the papers simply assume human causation.”
This statement at the beginning of Chapter 5 of Prof. Roy Spencer’s “Global Warming Skepticism for Busy People” begins an expose of a current variation of how to lie with statistics as being used in the 97% of scientists’ drumbeat. In fact, a 2015 study of UNIPCC papers found that “the papers surveyed (many of which were not even climate-science studies) merely had to acknowledge, or even simply not dispute, that a consensus exists in order to be counted as “endorsing” the consensus. Those that explicitly endorsed the consensus as stated above amounted to less than 1%, not 97%.” Further criticisms of the 97% , from 2016 and 2017, can be found in Chapter 5.
The alarmist claims of increasing storminess and increasing storm intensity is refuted in Chapter 14 with studies and charts on heat, drought, rainfall, hurricanes and tornadoes for periods as far back as the mid-1880s. It underscores that it has been worse than now.
Prof Spencer establishes how most climate “models” exclude natural effects on our climate and emphasize assumed human effects. The result is an exaggeration of every data series. How accurate have those “models” been? Grossly inaccurate. Would proposed changes based on faulty data produce positive results? Garbage in = garbage out.
Chapter 8 begins: Since pre-industrial times, the atmospheric concentration of CO2 has increased from an estimated … 0.0275% to 0.041% …today.” It continues with the “indoor air we breathe is three times the CO2 content of outdoor air”. Does that mean get outside more often?
Prof Spencer posits that most plants thrive on much higher levels of CO2, “…we should consider the possibility that we are helping nature…”. The misleading use of statistics without providing the appropriate scale or context, while belittling the doubts of trained geologists and meteorologists, is intellectual dishonesty.
The views, opinions, or positions expressed by the authors and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, positions of Redoubt News. Social Media, including Facebook, has greatly diminished distribution of our stories to our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting Main Stream Media sources. This is called ‘Shadow-banning’. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you. Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here: Paypal.me/RedoubtNews