More Climate Change Meltdown

From the British Guardian:

Scientists have been forced to withdraw a study on projected sea level rise due to global warming after finding mistakes that undermined the findings.

When it rains it pours, at least on climate scientists. This is something like the fourth or fifth big embarrassing story this month. But you gotta' love this line:

Mark Siddall [Earth Sciences, University of Bristol] said that he did not know whether the retracted paper's estimate of sea level rise was an overestimate or an underestimate.

Oh! Oh! I know the answer to that one teacher!

Comments

[Mike Cooper]

Good morning,

I am a SD expatriate (sigh) and I enjoy your blog. I wanted to comment on your 2-21 post on evolution and numbers. You said, "virtually all scientists accept this idea (evolution) as the evidence for it is overwhelming." One day later this post came out, talking about global warming and the problems with the evidence for it. My point is that much of the mainstream media and academia would say the same thing about both evolution and global warming: "(V)irtually all scientists accept this idea as the evidence for it is overwhelming."

Blessing,

Mike Cooper

[KB]

Good Question, Mike. I answer that in the one case the evidence is in fact overwhelming and in the other it isn't. Global warming alarmism was a political agenda using the authority of science to silence critics. Darwinian evolution is a theory that underpins nearly all of modern biology. There is no comparison between the two.

[George Mason]

Mr. Cooper; The people in the global warming business (and it is big business) have used the "virtually all scientists" line along with the "science settled" line to promote their agenda for some time now. Neither is true and never has been. If you were a scientist or had a scientific background you would have had too many unanswered questions to buy into what they are selling. It has been obvious to many of us from the beginning that these people were cherry picking their data. To question their means methods or results was a dangerous proposition. As the e-mails spelled out scientists who expressed skepticism would have their professional reputations defamed and publishers of professional journals had their lively hood put in doubt. Al Gore et.al. suggested that skeptics should be prosecuted for the crime of global warming denial. Hardly the tactics of people secure that their conclusions were irrefutable Today we know that the people at East Anglia knew for the past 15 years that the globe has been cooling. Their excuse for not producing this evidence before now is "the dog ate my homework." The science aside, the hysteria created by these people should be enough to make one question what type of science is being practiced.

[Mark Anderson]

I'm glad that humans don't affect the environment.