Posted by
Average Voter on Friday, April 27, 2007 12:03:27 PM
Richard S. Lindzen with MIT provides some clear logic when looking at data that typically gets cycled through the media. There are some questions on the base computer models that are used to predict climate change. Further, a look at CO2 and it's effects on the environment in the future is also questionable with current computer models.
Recently many people have said that the earth is facing a crisis requiring urgent action. This statement has nothing to do with science. There is no compelling evidence that the warming trend we've seen will amount to anything close to catastrophe. What most commentators—and many scientists—seem to miss is that the only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes.
There are so many variables and other things that we might not even be aware of that the use if these models are no more reliable than the local weather stations computer models that predict the weather ten days out. In Denver, they usually miss it big a couple of times at least.
But besides that argument, it is simply over reaction to the IPCC studies. To much credibility and attention is given to the U.N. and that is the problem. A lot of money flows in and out of that institution and everybody wants a piece of it.