Blame Global Warming
Maybe it’s just a deep down suspicion. Maybe it’s paranoia. But for some reason I get the sinking feeling that the many scientists who get paid and spend their life studying climate change…want climate change to be true!
Every once in a while I’ll read a news article that really makes me chuckle. You have to look a little deeper, but you usually find it there. The conclusions by many of these studies are forgone and the future vitality of the study itself is dependent on the conclusion being one thing, in favor of the idea of global warming!
Who would pay for a study on climate change if climate change wasn’t real, right?
My first chuckle came several months ago when, while in Europe, I was reading the USA Today. The AP had an article that said global warming is causing a massive growth of Cambodian pythons in the US! It won’t be long till they’re all the way up in Kansas!
The reasoning? Global warming has changed the climate in the Southern US such that it closely matches that of Cambodia. Breeding pythons have been found in the US, so they’re going to spread!
Look out Fido!!
What they left out was that for centuries parts of the US have had a climate very similar to Cambodia. Look at Florida which, by the way, is the only place that a breeding pair of pythons has ever been found. (They were pets that had been released into the everglades) They’re the only pair known of to date.
And if you’ve ever been to Central Texas…well, Central Texas is NOTHING like Cambodia, no matter how hot it gets.
After reading that article it has made me a little more aware of some of the obvious propaganda that is being cranked out.
The latest chuckle again came from the AP, whose writers seem by-in-large to assume Global Warming as a fact. What are we blaming on global warming now? Early Spring.
Now, at least this one makes sense, right? The Earth’s getting warmer, so spring is coming sooner? Let’s take a look at the facts that they present. This is where the chuckles begin.
First, there’s the fancy graph:
Surely that shows that global warming is real, right?? Just look at the cherry blossom bloom!
I’m willing to wager that without the caption, you would not be able to draw any conclusions from these graphs. In 2007, the cherry trees bloomed on around the 90th day or so of the year. Meanwhile in ’21 they bloomed on the 79th day and seem to have bounced between 80 and 105 days in ever since. We’re not even outside the scatter of the data!
Then they follow up with this statement:
You can see the trees and bushes blooming earlier. A photo of Lowell Cemetery, in Lowell, Mass., taken May 30, 1868, shows bare limbs. But the same scene photographed May 30, 2005, by Boston University biology professor Richard Primack shows them in full spring greenery.
Yet we just saw the degree of scatter in the cherry blossom bloom! What about in 1869? 1921? 1964? The author wants you to believe that it is a straight line down from 1868 to present, which is absolutely not the case! See the above chart!
Then came this whopper:
You can feel it in your nose from increased allergies. Spring airborne pollen is being released about 20 hours earlier every year, according to a Swiss study that looked at common allergies since 1979.
1979 to present…now there’s a wealth of data! And pollen release was 20 hours earlier every year since 1979? That’s a pretty exact number, and it doesn’t agree AT ALL with the cherry blossom bloom? Again, the study must have assumed a straight line between 1979 and now (and likely chose convenient intermediate points) OR they have fit a straight line to the data. I’d like to see the R-squared on that one! (R-squared is a measure of how good your regression fits the data).
And the one that really drove the point home is below:
What's happening is so noticeable that scientists can track it from space. Satellites measuring when land turns green found that spring "green-up" is arriving eight hours earlier every year on average since 1982 north of the Mason-Dixon line. In much of Florida and southern Texas and Louisiana, the satellites show spring coming a tad later, and bizarrely, in a complicated way, global warming can explain that too, the scientists said.
Well of course it can!
Every once in a while I’ll read a news article that really makes me chuckle. You have to look a little deeper, but you usually find it there. The conclusions by many of these studies are forgone and the future vitality of the study itself is dependent on the conclusion being one thing, in favor of the idea of global warming!
Who would pay for a study on climate change if climate change wasn’t real, right?
My first chuckle came several months ago when, while in Europe, I was reading the USA Today. The AP had an article that said global warming is causing a massive growth of Cambodian pythons in the US! It won’t be long till they’re all the way up in Kansas!
The reasoning? Global warming has changed the climate in the Southern US such that it closely matches that of Cambodia. Breeding pythons have been found in the US, so they’re going to spread!
Look out Fido!!
What they left out was that for centuries parts of the US have had a climate very similar to Cambodia. Look at Florida which, by the way, is the only place that a breeding pair of pythons has ever been found. (They were pets that had been released into the everglades) They’re the only pair known of to date.
And if you’ve ever been to Central Texas…well, Central Texas is NOTHING like Cambodia, no matter how hot it gets.
After reading that article it has made me a little more aware of some of the obvious propaganda that is being cranked out.
The latest chuckle again came from the AP, whose writers seem by-in-large to assume Global Warming as a fact. What are we blaming on global warming now? Early Spring.
Now, at least this one makes sense, right? The Earth’s getting warmer, so spring is coming sooner? Let’s take a look at the facts that they present. This is where the chuckles begin.
First, there’s the fancy graph:
Surely that shows that global warming is real, right?? Just look at the cherry blossom bloom!
I’m willing to wager that without the caption, you would not be able to draw any conclusions from these graphs. In 2007, the cherry trees bloomed on around the 90th day or so of the year. Meanwhile in ’21 they bloomed on the 79th day and seem to have bounced between 80 and 105 days in ever since. We’re not even outside the scatter of the data!
Then they follow up with this statement:
You can see the trees and bushes blooming earlier. A photo of Lowell Cemetery, in Lowell, Mass., taken May 30, 1868, shows bare limbs. But the same scene photographed May 30, 2005, by Boston University biology professor Richard Primack shows them in full spring greenery.
Yet we just saw the degree of scatter in the cherry blossom bloom! What about in 1869? 1921? 1964? The author wants you to believe that it is a straight line down from 1868 to present, which is absolutely not the case! See the above chart!
Then came this whopper:
You can feel it in your nose from increased allergies. Spring airborne pollen is being released about 20 hours earlier every year, according to a Swiss study that looked at common allergies since 1979.
1979 to present…now there’s a wealth of data! And pollen release was 20 hours earlier every year since 1979? That’s a pretty exact number, and it doesn’t agree AT ALL with the cherry blossom bloom? Again, the study must have assumed a straight line between 1979 and now (and likely chose convenient intermediate points) OR they have fit a straight line to the data. I’d like to see the R-squared on that one! (R-squared is a measure of how good your regression fits the data).
And the one that really drove the point home is below:
What's happening is so noticeable that scientists can track it from space. Satellites measuring when land turns green found that spring "green-up" is arriving eight hours earlier every year on average since 1982 north of the Mason-Dixon line. In much of Florida and southern Texas and Louisiana, the satellites show spring coming a tad later, and bizarrely, in a complicated way, global warming can explain that too, the scientists said.
Well of course it can!
posted by Cogito at 11:46 AM
2 Comments:
These type of articles always make me laugh, but they also make me sad. Do they teach critical reading in school anymore? How is it that so many seemingly educated people are accepting the claims of global warming at face value? I mean I understand the politicians jumping on board, because it's about money and votes to them, but the general public should be asking more questions.
What frustrates me is that I no longer am able to believe what I read in articles concerning studies. And not just global warming studies, but really any topic. My favorite are the studies on human behavior, because the conclusions that are drawn usually seem to be pre-decided or pulled from the clouds.
For most of these studies, I can probably find a different study that comes to the exact opposite conclusion. So in the end we are left wondering which to believe...
Brad G.
P.S. I also enjoy reading theories on the origin of the planets, the universe, etc. No one seems to agree on that either.
Brad,
You're absolutely right. It's a shame that no one ever questions anything anymore. They take everything at face value and don't think for themselves whether what they're being told is true. It is truly sad.
Most of these studies, especially the ones on climate change, are statistically based. And to quote the great American author Mark Twain:
"There are three kinds of lies in this world. White lies, bold faced lies, and statistics."
I'm glad to see you posted though, I thought my hiatus had completely driven off my only two reader/posters!
Post a Comment
<< Home