Image via WikipediaFinally. Scientists have come up with real, data-based evidence of world-wide global warming at the turn of the millennium. Ha ha ha. Deniers, we mock you! If Al Gore knew this, he would be dancing in his grave. Wait a minute. He's not dead yet. Al Gore is dancing in his mansion and his houseboat.
Well, there might be one tiny problem. The global warming took place at the end of the first millennium rather than at the end of the second. And it was a lot hotter than now.
Lawrence Solomon has another solid article on the controversy.
7 comments:
So, what's a millenium or two?
It's just an off-by-one error, right?
Gore/Suzuki and lizzie should worry, along with that guy that predicted the end of the world.
Seismotologists being sued for not predicting earthquake. blaze.com
Solomon is quite mistaken if he thinks the Medieval Warm Period is a "new" discovery. It's also irrelevant to the climate change discussion. Nobody has ever claimed that the temperature didn't rise or fall in the past, or that there weren't periods where the temperature was higher than it is currently. Solomon is intelligent enough to know this.
The climate change argument is about the rate of change over time.
I think the point of the article is that the warming was not just a regional warming of Europe -- it was world-wide.
"The climate change argument is about the rate of change over time."
No...it's about whether or not it is caused by human activity!
Sixth Estate said..."Nobody has ever claimed that there weren't periods where the temperature was higher than it is currently."
Then why did Michael Mann put so much effort into creating his (now totally discredited) "hockey stick" graph of historical temperatures - which "disappeared" the Medieval Warm Period - a period that was warmer than it is today - so he could make today's temps appear "unprecedented" ?
Now you're saying it's not about temperatures at all, but the "rate of change?" Nice try !
Post a Comment