Bob McCarty Writes

Growing up in the home of a petroleum geologist, I enjoyed reading a variety of magazines — many of them scientific.  As the magazines arrived in our mailbox, I would consume them immediately. One of those I always enjoyed reading was Popular Science.  Emphasis on past tense.

These days, I’m less inclined to read the magazine, online or off, because of the it’s editorial slant — or apparent gullibility — on the subject of global warming.

Case in point: A March 9 guest-blogger piece, Pronouncement of Global Warming’s Demise On Thin Ice, written by Dr. Bill Chameides, dean of Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment.

Amidst baffling readers with a plethora of numbers and charts, he asserts that the years 1998 and 2005 are interesting to compare before writing that those years are the two warmest years on record.  And so slips his credibility.

Apparently, the good doctor fell asleep in class and missed hearing about NASA’s August 2007 silent release of corrected figures showing that the warmest year on record is now 1934? News about it is still online at DAILY TECH.  And he remained asleep when, on Aug. 29, 2007, the DAILY TECH published a post containing the findings of a survey published in the journal Energy and Environment?  It contained the following eye-opening findings:

Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers “implicit” endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category  (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis.  This is no “consensus.”

If Dr. Chameides is willing to wake up and admit he’s wrong, heck, I’ll send him his choice of one of the t-shirts shown below:

NOTE: To shop for your very own GLOBULL WARMING or Global Warming is a Myth gear, simply click on one of the links or images above.

Be Sociable, Share!

•