What are the implications of recent climate controversies?
Well from my reading around here, the believers need a bit of a boost and some soothing. They seem to be getting out of sorts.
Being the gentleman that I am, I present to you a more refreshing version of the state of the climate change issue. There, see, nothing is wrong with you, all is well.
You’re welcome.
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2010/02/18/implications-of-recent-climate-science-controversies/
All the arguments about weather man made global warming is true or a hoax is due to global warming. It’s causing people to become "hot headed".
Same reason the great lakes are freezing over and it’s snowing in Florida & Cuba.
And record cold winters across the entire northern hemisphere.
And the return of 95% on the Antarctica ice sheets and the advance of glaciers around the world. etc. etc.
As a matter of fact man made global warming is to blame for our current economic crisis.
There haven’t been any "recent climate controversies." Yes, there have been a rash of ridiculous zombie arguments coming from the British tabloids in recent weeks.
The only thing that comes close to a controversy was when the press picked up on the fact that the IPCC completely bungled two paragraphs on the impacts of climate change on the Himalayan glaciers (This section screwed up much more here than that 2035 date that everyone been throwing around). What was lost was any sort of context. The Himalayan glaciers ARE rapidly melting. Humans ARE still releasing increasing amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. A physical property of CO2 still IS greenhouse warming. Water shortages from retreating glaciers still will become a huge burden for India and China.
Thanks, but no boost was needed.
There’s been a rash of stories about admitted mistakes that involve minor details, but don’t come close to touching the basics.
Real, mostly caused by us, serious.
This is a favorite tactic of New Earth Creationists, try to cast doubt on the well established conclusions of science by picking at details. As propaganda, it can be effective. Something like half of the US population thinks evolution in general is wrong. In the world of serious professionals, not so much.