So if the models are so hopelessly riddled with errors and uncertainty that an anthropogenic radiative forcing signal cannot be distinguished from noise, or if the total magnitude of the warming attributed to humans is one-tenth to one-hundredth of the error or uncertainty ranges, why are those who dare question the degree to which humans affect the Earth’s climate branded as “deniers” of science?

Kenneth Richard, http://notrickszone.com/2017/03/13/uncertainties-errors-in-radiative-forcing-estimates-10-100-times-larger-than-entire-radiative-effect-of-increasing-co2/


Tuesday, 25 May 2010

Another climate website?

Why another web site on climate? As far as I can see, there is no web site in the UK for those concerned about inaccuracies, and harmful consequences, in alarmist materials reaching our schoolchildren. In particular, I am concerned over the possibility that some people will deliberately or accidentally frighten children about their future, and about their impact on climate.

In view of the zealotry which has led to so many errors and manipulations in the IPCC reports, the distribution of a seriously misleading DVD on climate to schools, and government propaganda on climate which the Advertising Standards Authority could not stomach, I think there are grounds for concern.

I hope that through this site, I will be able to learn more about materials being used in schools, or otherwise produced for schoolchildren on climate. I hope to collate links and papers on such materials, and gather commentary on them. If my concerns turn out to be justified, I hope this site will help and encourage the production of better materials. I hope also to give whatever publicity this modest effort can produce to good materials and events on climate, that is materials which seemed designed to inform rather than frighten, and which maintain high standards of scientific integrity.