Warming: a little cool, the wind turns

[Exnihiloest]

Even alarmists see their cuti and deny their faith!
"A scientific paper published this week by Nature Geoscience of the group "Nature", little suspicious of complacency towards climatesceptics, finds that global warming has been overestimated by the models of prediction that justify the concerted action against the emissions of gas Greenhouse effect. The article has the peculiarity of having as principal author Ben Santer, one of the pioneers of the movement that accuses the human activity of global warming. "
http://reinformation.tv/modeles-rechauf ... n-71718-2/

The article in question:
https://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vao ... o2973.html
"We conclude that model overestimation of tropospheric warming in the early twenty-first century is partially due to systematic deficiencies in some of the post-2000 external forcings used in the model simulations."
"We conclude that model overestimation of tropospheric warming in the early years of the 21st century is partly due to systematic deficiencies affecting a number of external forcing factors used in model simulations".

I was wrong to doubt the warming as presented to us ... because it is always wrong to be right too early.

[izentrop]

Hello,

I was wrong to doubt the warming as presented to us ... because it is always wrong to be right too early.

Hola! Not so fast.
REINFORMATION.TV ... serious? http://www.lessentiel.lu/fr/news/monde/ ... --28011660

The vast majority of studies conclude that man is responsible for climate change. https://theierecosmique.com/2015/09/24/ ... limatique/

In other subjects, you agree with the consensus and condemn dogmatism and there ??

[Exnihiloest]

I think the majority is wrong and the majority is biased, as skeptical scientists can not be heard. Having said that, discussing this point would be in vain.
I therefore stick to the concrete elements preludes to a change of trend. That a climacteradicalized like Santer is switching into the repentant clan is a sign.
I do not say that there is no warming, I do not say that man has no share of responsibility, I only say that models, past forecasts, and alarmism around, Is mostly stew. Climate scientists do not master their subject matter (they have good apologies, such as the complexity of their discipline, or the physics skills they do not necessarily have, but they would have had to admit).

Come on, we give a little blow to those who would believe, with the heat wave of recent times, that it would be exceptional:

TemperMarseille.png (45.04 Kio) Viewed 3637 times

Well no...

[sen-no-sen]

I am not saying that there is no warming, I am not saying that man has no share of responsibility, I only say that models, past forecasts, And the scaremongering around, it's mostly stew. Climate scientists do not master their subject matter (they have good apologies, such as the complexity of their discipline, or the physics skills they do not necessarily have, but they would have had to admit).

And what would be the use of such an alarmism according to you?

[Ahmed]

What is not trivial is to find scientific ignorance and to infer a certainty ...

[izentrop]

Skeptical scientists unable to be heard. Having said that, discussing this point would be in vain.

who is silent consents.

Climatologists do not master their subject

This should be supported with acceptable arguments, otherwise it is only pretentious.

[Exnihiloest]

And what would be the use of such an alarmism according to you?

Being an aficionados of the trick in vogue world is rewarding. Climatologists, obscure scientists 20 or 30 years, have become the masters of the world (almost, Trump opposed it, it is the only positive point of its activity but not necessarily for the right reasons). Their organizations raise subsidies, the media are at their boot and add to it because the subject sells. The climatologist is the fashionable scientist, like those of radioactivity in the time of Marie Curie, except that today scientific ethics is not what it used to be.

[Ahmed]

Isn't it gratifying to oppose this mainstream by asserting its "cultural exception"?

[Exnihiloest]

Skeptical scientists unable to be heard. Having said that, discussing this point would be in vain.

who is silent consents.

I have not been silent. I say that discussing on this point here would be futile (too much complexity).

Climatologists do not master their subject

This should be supported with acceptable arguments, otherwise it is only pretentious.

It seems to me that I have already given elements:
- the IPCC's regularly false forecasts (the one on warming, from 2007 to 2015, false from single to double)
- with each new report, they explain why the predictions of the previous one were not correct, while continuing the predictions to the Nostradamus (argumentum ad novitatem) as for the end of the world
- reversal of Gulfe stream, finally no
- the glaciers of the Himalayas which had to melt for 2035,
- reduction on 2000-2020 of 50% of African agriculture fueled solely by rainwater, ultimately not
- the blow of the "reaction force" on the raindrops, however in free fall (Newton must turn back in his grave)
...
Physicists regularly denounce the lack of mastery of physics by climatologists, for example https://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1161 ou https://arxiv.org/abs/0707.1276

[Exnihiloest]

Isn't it gratifying to oppose this mainstream by asserting its "cultural exception"?

Climate-savvy scientists break their teeth, they are marginalized, I do not see what is rewarding.
And personally I have nothing to prove. It is the end of 2006 that I became aware of, thanks to the papers of physicists who were the first to put me in the spotlight, of the extreme fragility of everything we are assured as certainties about the climate.
I do not believe that I can be accused of being a protestor of science in general. If I have the climatology in the sights, it is because I think I have factual elements to question this subject and not another, a subject become a true propaganda by its scope and its methods. And I let you know. My motivation ? Lying and complacency toward inaccuracies, unjustified approximations, and mistakes, have always horrified me, moreover when it becomes a political pretext for anything.