Author Jeffrey Kiehl, of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), speculates on relationships between CO2 levels and average global surface temperature 30 million to 100 million years ago, and currently observed CO2 levels. To no one ‘s surprise, Kiehl assumes, without evidence, that atmospheric CO2 drives global average surface temperatures, and includes this bias in climate models, projecting an increase of atmospheric CO2 to 1,000 ppm by the end of the 21st Century, with temperatures soaring tens of degrees above the 20th Century average (whatever that means).
Climate studies have been driven by the availability of grants. In the past, scientific studies were carefully duplicated before publication in peer reviewed journals. Now, computer models are confused with the scientific results they are not. Anyone can publish any claim in any publication in an effort to garner additional grant money. I guess that is a good thing for otherwise unemployed scientists!
Over hundreds of years, “real” scientists developed procedures for exploring the whys of the world. Clarice explores this lost art and attributes the demise of true science exploration to a degraded education system. http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/01/clarices_pieces_be_scientific.html
Curt’s post shows yet another unsubstantiated claim that the Earth will warm to extreme temperatures. A quick look at Jo Nova shows that the climate scientist may have programmed their climate computers with the wrong data! Imagine that.
A study of the Earth’s climate requires more than specialized weather men. Climate is a very complex phenomenon that involves physics, chemistry, biology as well as many other fields of study. For one person to claim they have the answers to anything concerning climate is extremely precocious. If that person is a politician like Al Gore, we should all put our hands on our wallets!