I have been ignoring the issue of Global Warming for a while, because it is pretty much settled. Anyone who still believes in Warmism is stupid, crazy, or lying. Usually stupid.
But, a short summary:
The internal emails and documents of a conspiracy to falsify science, which revealed that peer review is a conspiratorial system to ensure that holy views are published and heretical views are not published, regardless of facts and evidence. I have read about six hundred of the slightly over a thousand emails of the first Climategate release, and every single one is incriminating. They are all more or less summarized by the infamous email “trick to … hide the decline”. If you twit a leftist on any of the emails, they will patronizingly explain to you that “decline” does not mean what it sounds like it means, but resist explaining “trick” or “hide” no matter how vigorously you twit them on it, implicitly admitting that they know full well that “trick” and “hide” mean exactly what they sound like they mean. The first climategate release was the emails of a criminal conspiracy to falsify science. The second climategate release was the emails of a holy priesthood engaged in a crusade to purify the planet of the sins of mankind.
The climategate files not only give us reason to disbelieve “Climate Science”, but discredit all peer reviewed science. Peer review means you don’t get the actual evidence, but rather the consensus about what the evidence should show if it was not so wickedly prone to evil heresy. Peer review means that a consensus is quietly established behind closed doors, and then the evidence is corrected to agree with the consensus. This maximizes the authority and prestige of official science, at the expense of disconnecting it from reality. Science got along fine without peer review until the 1940s. The core of the scientific method is “Nullius in Verba”, “take no one’s word for it”. Peer Review reverses that for taking the word of a secret committee of scientists reaching agreement behind closed doors, reaching agreement for secret reasons on the basis of secret evidence.
No observed warming:
Supposedly the surface instrument record indicates the world warmed rapidly from 1975 to 1998. Climate scientists issued a bunch of models that accurately retrodicted this supposed warming, and projected it into the future, projecting doom.
Unfortunately, they then started making accurate measurements of climate, and, by and large, since 1998 the climate has cooled down as much as it warmed up. For sixteen years, there has been no net global warming. Climate models retrodict with wonderful, indeed quite improbable, accuracy, but have totally failed at predicting.
The surface instrument system was not maintained for the purpose of measuring minute long term changes in climate, but large days to day variations in weather. So equipment was frequently moved or replaced, generally moved to some place closer to people because of technological changes in the equipment.
Thus the surface climate record has large systematic errors if one attempts to extract climate data from that record. If one ad hoc corrects for those sources of error that tend to contradict the result one wants, and is less apt to correct for those sources of error that produce the result one wants, one can produce, in the short term, pretty much any result one wants.
Careful examination of “corrections” made by the warmists reveals some rather disturbing ad hoc corrections. They knew what the result should be, and if the data failed to agree, simply changed it, on the quite plausible basis that we know the data to be total cow manure. Since there is in fact no accurate indication of whether the world warmed in the period 1975 to 1998, they were totally justified in pulling data out of their asses.
Now in fact we have rather good data indicating the world did not warm up much over the period 1975 to 1998. In particular, global sea ice remains much the same as ever it was and the tree line has not moved.
But, supposing that the world did warm by the amount claimed over this period, climate models provide a very good fit, a suspiciously good fit, to that warming. Their retrodiction is extremely accurate, suspiciously so, given that what they are retrodicting is not at all accurately known.
Hence the Spirit of Mawson expedition attempted to sail through ice that their ideology told them was not there.
So, since 1998, the gap between the 1998 models and reality has grown very rapidly. They retrodict wonderfully, but their predictions have
been a total failure.
And same is, I expect, likely to be true for the 2014 models.