They then use the following trick. They re-plot their model graph, but without an increase in greenhouse gases; this absence of forcing now generates a gap between the reported warming and unforced model. Then they turn around and argue that this gap must be due to an increase in greenhouse gases. It appears to me that this argument may be circular. Even if the reported late-20th-century surface warming really exists (it is absent from the satellite and radiosonde records), the IPCC argument is not convincing.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/11/ipcc_s_bogus_evidence_for_global_warming.html#ixzz2kdfByFe1
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment