Researchers compared 117 climate predictions made in the 1990s to the actual amount of warming. Out of 117 predictions, 3 were roughly accurate and 114 overestimated the amount of warming. In other words, those making the predictions were wrong 97.4% of the time.
That's some "science"!
It gets worse.
A climate scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, John Christy, this is nothing new. Environmentalist ideologues have been wong 35 years--as far back as 1979--the first year for which reliable satellite temperature data exists for comparative purposes. Studying 73 climate models dating back to 1979, Christy found every study was wrong.
Even with a 100% error rate, the environmental ideologues--like ---remain unconvinced, devising with all sorts of ex post facto confounding factors. For example, a climate scientist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, Melanie Fitzpatrick said:
[The study] is neither surprising nor particularly troubling to me as a
climate scientist. The work of our community is constantly to refine
our understanding of the climate system and improve models based
Really? The nation's environmental policy should be based upon alleged research that has failed to support its hypothesis nearly 100% of the time with the explanation being "Oh, we should have considered x, y, and z?"
Only for environmentalists and their minions in the White House and Congress.
Why not figure out what the facts are first?
Let the discussion begin..
To read the debate, click on the following link: