What I Learned about Climate Change: The Science is not Settled

  1. Critical Thinking
  2. Four Hard Questions
  3. The Climate Consensus
  4. Manufacturing Consensus
  5. Who Can We Believe?
  6. What Should We Do?
  7. Summary
  8. What Do You Think?
  1. What are the natural drivers of temperature and its variability?
  2. What does the projected natural increase in temperature mean for the environment and people?
  3. What does the increase in greenhouse gases from human activity mean for oceans, environment, animals, habitats, and humanity?
  4. Is Decarbonation the Right Solution?

1. What are the natural drivers of temperature and its variability?

Smoking gun #1: The Hockey Stick is Wrong; The Medieval warming period was real and worldwide.

  • Class I and II only (most accurate): 0.155 C
  • Class III, IV, and V sites only: 0.248 C
  • NOAA 2015 “adjusted” calculation: 0.309 C

Smoking gun #2: Government agencies have rigged climate data to support man-made global warming.

Smoking gun #3: Solar fluctuations correlate better with observed temperature fluctuations.

2. What does the projected natural increase in temperature mean for the environment and people?

3. What does the increase in greenhouse gases mean for oceans, environment, animals, habitats, and humanity?

  1. According to Bob Tisdale, a researcher I respect after reading his book Climate Models Fail, the IPCC models simply aren’t skillful. They failed to predict the past twenty years, they don’t realistically model the cloud response, and there is simply too much uncertainty about the inputs to get decent outputs.
  2. NASA GISS, in realizing that global temperatures refuse to conform to their models, has said that the increase in heat is trapped in the oceans. This bit of model trickery also does not stand up to careful analysis.
  3. The IPCC models are falsifiable — if temperature doesn’t go up over the next ten years or so, we will have to agree that the IPCC models are, and always were, dead wrong. It is not looking good.
  4. According to J Scott Armstrong, all climate models so far don’t meet the minimum criteria for a skillful forecast. He has testified before congress on climate forecasts, polar-bear counts, and other misconceptions. Here is his 15-minute talk:

Smoking Gun #4: Rigged Inputs and Wrong Assumptions About Feedback Lead to Computer Model Failure.

Smoking Gun #5: All metastudies so far disagree with the IPCC projections.

4. Is decarbonization the right solution?

Provocateur, professional heretic, slayer of myths, speaker of truthiness to powerfulness, and defender of the Oxford comma.

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
David Siegel

David Siegel

Provocateur, professional heretic, slayer of myths, speaker of truthiness to powerfulness, and defender of the Oxford comma.

More from Medium

Policymakers Must Focus on These 6 Areas to Slow Down Climate Change

How to Feed the World: Cereals and Our Daily Bread

Can we afford to have a future?

Head shots of Gil Friend and Andrew Winston

Will I Ever Need a Car Again?

Individualized transport will never give us a sustainable future