Climate Skeptic Groups Launch Global Anti-Science Campaign

[xchrom]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-19/climate-skeptic-groups-launch-global-anti-science-campaign.html

InsideClimateNews.org — Conservative groups at the forefront of global warming skepticism are doubling down on trying to discredit the next big report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In recent weeks, they've been cranking out a stream of op-eds, blogs and reports to sow doubt in the public's mind before the report is published, with no end in sight.

"The goal is to inform the public, scientific community and media that the upcoming IPCC report doesn't have all the science to make informed judgments," said Jim Lakely, a spokesman for the Heartland Institute, a libertarian think tank based in Chicago that has been spearheading the efforts.

Heartland gained notoriety last year after running a billboard campaign comparing climate change believers to "Unabomber" Ted Kaczynski, which caused several corporate donors to withdraw support for the group.

The fifth assessment by the IPCC, the world's leading scientific advisory body on global warming, is expected to conclude with at least 95 percent certainty that human activities have caused most of earth's temperature rise since 1950, and will continue to do so in the future. That's up from a confidence level of 90 percent in 2007, the year the last assessment came out. The IPCC, which consists of thousands of scientists and reviewers from more than 100 countries, shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Vice President Al Gore. Governments often use its periodic reviews of climate risks to set targets for reducing carbon emissions and other policies.

[Eddie Haskell]

1. Are Americans smarter than a fifth grader?

This article is pure bs. The graph below (see link) shows global temperatures plotted against time. Using 1998 as the starting point of a trend is a deliberate attempt to cook the numbers. It is not only unscientific, it is dishonest! Climate change is measured by averages determined over decades. 1998 was an unusually warm year ... An aberration. No "real" scientist would select 1998 as the starting point for a trend. The red line (five year average temp.) on the graph below shows a clear and continuing warming trend.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11639-climate-myths-the-cooling-after-1940-shows-co2-does-not-cause-warming.html&h=620&w=808&sz=84&tbnid=IoDQF9vTEVg5HM:&tbnh=87&tbnw=114&zoom=1&usg=__TyceO4YI3UF4L89fI--1OrH2jzY=&docid=mX1PS8p3nGOBIM&sa=X&ei=DWo8UvHxOajD4AO5h4HQDw&ved=0CDIQ9QEwAQ

A fifth grader could debunk this crap.

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. When you say 'this article', I presume you mean the 'Heartland Institute' report

because the article in the OP doesn't make any claims about 1998. Indeed, I was glad to see Bloomberg ran with the 'anti-science' headline.

[Eddie Haskell]

3. There have been a number of articles.

The point is, any fifth grader could tell you that selectively picking 1998 as the starting point is a deliberate attempt to distort the science. I was not questioning your grade level, but those that believe this bull.