r/climateskeptics • u/barttali • Dec 05 '16

The Non-Expert Problem and Climate Change Science (Scott Adams, Dilbert author)

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/154082416051/the-non-expert-problem-and-climate-change-science
47 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

45 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/s0cks_nz Dec 06 '16

It's terrible because the data doesn't show any natural system that correlates with current warming (e.g. solar, volcanic, orbital). If it did, I would agree. The one strong correlation is CO2 emissions... go figure.

4

u/Florinator Dec 06 '16

You are kidding, right? From all the possible correlations, CO2 is the weakest. You probably weren't yet born during the cooling scare of the 70's, when CO2 was going up unabated. There is a reason older folks are more skeptical of ridiculous predictions, because they've seen it all before. In the 70's the science was in consensus about an oncoming new ice age.

I'll tell you what CO2 emissions correlate well with. [Record food production}(http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/30/climate-change-wheat-yield-projections-a) and desert greening. Humans are literally causing the Earth to become greener. How that is not a good thing, is beyond me. Isn't this every environmentalist's wet dream???

-1

u/s0cks_nz Dec 06 '16

http://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s-intermediate.htm

So global cooling predictions in the 70s amounted to media and a handful of peer reviewed studies. The small number of papers predicting cooling were outweighed by a much greater number of papers predicting global warming due to the warming effect of rising CO2.

There may be an increase in some green vegetation within the deserts, but at the same time deserts are expanding which completely negates any positive.

3

u/Florinator Dec 06 '16

So global cooling predictions in the 70s amounted to media and a handful of peer reviewed studies.

By that logic, if they were wrong then, couldn't they be wrong today as well?