On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 1:50:30 PM UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/12/15 11:31, Big Les Wade wrote:
Bob posted
I'm also persuaded by the fact that this was all predicted before it
actually started being measurable. It is possible to dig out the
literature and confirm this with ones own eyes, and I'm not sure that
even TNP would argue that the global conspiracy began in the 60s.

But that too is a cherry-picking argument. From the myriad of
predictions made by climatologists in the 60s and 70s (many of which
predicted global *cooling*) you are picking out a few predictions that
turned out to be a reasonable match to what actually happened later, and
saying, "look, those models must be the ones that describe what's
actually going on".

Now I know the usual reply to this criticism is "well what else could
you possibly do when testing statistical hypotheses?" OK, maybe there
isn't anything else we could do, but that still doesn't make it a good
scientific method.

actually the rise - and the pause - in global temperatures is a far
better match to the growth in air traffic, if you put a 5 year lag in
between

Correlation is not causation, but total *lack* of correlation is strong
evidence that causation is non-existent. That is te current state of
AGW, there is absolutely NO correlation between temperatures and CO2
over the last 100 years apart from a brief period from 1978-1998

--
the biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

What happens if the 100 years flood in Cumbria happens again next weekend, does that be come the normal?