With the current El Nino pushing up the only credible global temperature measurement from the satellites, I expected to see a bit more excitement from the (once) mainstream media … but no!
I must admit I’m very much just dipping into global warming these days, but even so, I seem to have missed anything like the great media events that some previous years were turned into.
Why has the fire gone out?
I’m interested in climate, but I have to admit that even I am finding it difficult to find interest in the same news stories that are turning up in the same media outlets time and time again. How many times can one person say “the surface temperature is fake” or similar words. And more than likely these days a dozen people will have all I was going to say and more before I even try to comment.
So, rather like all the weather “once in a lifetime” records we now get almost weekly from the weather (for statistical reasons), it now seems that most of the media are fed up reporting yet another supposedly “record” year. And worse … even when they do report it … all the “0.00001C warmer” figure ever highlights is how far the whole scam is from the “burning up into a fireball earth” that it was supposed to be.
So, in strange way, these supposed records seem to me to be having the opposite effect from that the extremists wanted. Because whilst there was nothing to report … most of the public and politicians just assumed “global warming” was happening. Most of the gullible greens just went along with what they had been led to believe was already happening.
But it is only when they see the 0.000000001C (is that too many zeros?) warming that actually happened that they realise just how much hasn’t been happening and that’s when they work out they’ve been conned.
It’s not when we sceptics point out nothing is happening …. its when their own pet journalists try to make a mountain of a news story out of a molehill temperature rise. That’s when it really seems to be hitting the gullible=greens the hardest.
The problem with Bandwagoneering
That is the problem with these scams. When they start, the extremists can pick on any unusual event that comes along and create headlines. The problem of course, is that for every drought there is a flood, for every cold winter a warm one, etc. And once you’ve run one opportunist headline ascribing one type of weather to “global warming” … you’ve made your bed so to speak and are then even when another event comes along, the headline grabbing nature has disappeared and more than likely it’s be the “wrong kind of disaster”.
It’s the data python Stupid
When small a python is a very malleable creature – so that like the data on “warming” it can be easily fitted to any shape you want. And so the handler can more or less make the “data python” show any result they like (usually by cherry picking start and ends … by adding “corrections” … which although small are very significant in a short run of data).
But like the python, as the data grows, it begins to restrict the movement of the handler. So, whereas once the handler would force the python into the shape they wanted, soon the python is large enough that it begins to force the handler into the shape the python takes.
And, then finally, when the data is just so overwhelming, the wriggle room begins to disappear totally. Then when the data shows a short term event such as “no snow” and the climate extremists proclaim “the end of snow” …. then the python constricts them to that position … and when as inevitably happens it snows … the python crushes and crushes them sooner or later extinguishing all life from the extremists who dabble with the data python.
That is how the data python works. It starts off being their alley … it ends up crushing all except those who tried to abuse it.
Good points all.
I could never be convinced that CO2 would “fry the earth” since I was trained way before post-normal science came into vogue and people stopped believing in the laws of physics and thermodynamics.
Mankind’s effects on the climate (and there are such) are tiny. The effects of Land Use and other such items are overwhelmed by Mother Nature.
Admittedly it’s the middle of the night but I’m confused. The end of the last sentence reads ‘it ends up crushing all except those who tried to abuse it’. Is that what you meant. Doesn’t it rather crush those who abused it or tried to?