Login
  • 1

Scientists From 1600 Years Ago Are Unavailable For Comment

The Gulf Stream is supposedly slower than at any time in the past 1600 years. Pay no attention to the lack of data.

The Weather Channel is hyping a report in the journal Nature that suggests the Gulf Stream is the slowest it has been in 1600 years. If you go to the link, you can see the anchor's video report on the study. What you will not see is that in the article the Weather Channel notes another study in the same journal says the slow down in the last 150 years has not been caused by man made global warming.

A separate study, also released Wednesday in the journal Nature, claims the 150-year slowdown of the AMOC is a result of natural changes, not man-made climate change. But both conclude the slowdown is occurring, and it could impact our weather in the coming years.

The Weather Channel focused on the former study and not the later story on its televised report and only threw in at the end that some scientists are skeptical because of a lack of data. "MIT professor Carl Wunsch said the study's 'assertions of weakening are conceivable, but unsupported by any data' in an interview with the AP." Not the "by any data."

We have gotten to the point of religious assertion in the global warming debate when scientists, without any data and credible conflicting studies, can declare that 1600 years ago the Gulf Stream was slower than it is now, but the current slowdown is the result of man made global warming.

Scientists from 1600 years ago were unavailable for comment.

I see believing in something from 1,600 years ago without any evidence for it is reserved solely for religion.
We should all want good evidence for things before we accept them. On the other hand, wanting scientists from 1,600 years ago to attest to something is ignorant. We can determine things in the past from clues in the present. For example, all of archeology is based on observations we make in the present and inferences into the past.

Still Professor Wunsch is on record stating "I believe that climate change is real, a major threat, and almost surely has a major human-induced component" so the larger story remains the same. The seas are rising, time to buy a boat.

Only poloticians are less reliable than weather forcast. All other profesions have error limmits where you get your money and find a new carrier. LOW " looking out window" most accurate. Forcast most reliable for about 15 minutes degrading rapidly there after. Global warming is a mix of carbon credit fraud arrogance and presuption, pure mythology.

Yes, and how much of this "scientific study" ends up disproved? The whole idea that is presented is that science, by definition, is testable or it's not science. Archaeology looks for facts in the digging of artifacts, while so much of the science behind climate change and such is THEORIES that are not testable or repeatable. There are many scientists out there that are silenced because they question the "theory de jour" of the government controlled scientific community.

Here's what happened: a transwoman stuck her penis in the gulf stream, creating a slowing obstruction. This is true because I FEEL it's true. But we do need to change "man made global warming" to "person made global warming". This would empower women and chimps to enact positive corrections.

Stories