More on global warming
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6290228.stm
This is exactly why I have doubts about man-made climate change.
"All the graphs they showed stopped in about 1980, and I knew why, because things diverged after that. You can't just ignore bits of data that you don't like," the scientist is quoted as saying of the "anti" lobby.
And next to that is a graph showing world temperature from 1972 to date, along with a description of their study into cosmic rays over the last 30-40 years.
So why 1972 and 30-40 years I wondered? So I looked at http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap15/global_temp.html and, ooh look, 1972 was almost *precisely* the year that global temperature started rising again after the 25 years or so in which it didn't (despite CO2 rising steadily throughout).
So now who's "ignoring bits of data that you don't like"? Whilst having the holier-than-thou gall to criticise others for doing the same thing. Bad science. Bad bad science.
This is exactly why I have doubts about man-made climate change.
"All the graphs they showed stopped in about 1980, and I knew why, because things diverged after that. You can't just ignore bits of data that you don't like," the scientist is quoted as saying of the "anti" lobby.
And next to that is a graph showing world temperature from 1972 to date, along with a description of their study into cosmic rays over the last 30-40 years.
So why 1972 and 30-40 years I wondered? So I looked at http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap15/global_temp.html and, ooh look, 1972 was almost *precisely* the year that global temperature started rising again after the 25 years or so in which it didn't (despite CO2 rising steadily throughout).
So now who's "ignoring bits of data that you don't like"? Whilst having the holier-than-thou gall to criticise others for doing the same thing. Bad science. Bad bad science.