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?
Wednesday, 9 June 2010
I want to make available to others, the set of links which I am building up, and which I find useful for insight into climate materials, and also for finding rebuttals of climate alarmism. I anticipate that something like this should provide help for anyone encountering poor teaching materials, and looking for ammunition to help get them improved.
It is not clear to me how best to share the links yet. Suggestions would be most welcome.
In the meantime, here is a .csv file containing 127 links, searchable using the column entitled 'Tags'. It opens easily using Excel: http://rapidshare.com/files/397131228/ClimateLessonsLinks2010_06_09.csv