Anytime that you read claims that invoke disasters loss trends as an indication of human-caused climate change, (...) you can simply call "bullshit" and point to the IPCC Special Report on extremes report.(actually, I need comments: what does this mean exactly for anthropogenic climate change discourse? Global warming is real, but it's not what it seems to be - so it is what exactly? A permanent exercise: it's not enough to blame alarmists and skeptics to define one's own position. How to phrase it without distancing oneself from others: how "alarmist" will that sound? And does an "agenda" follow from this? Or is having "no agenda" the consequence of blaming others "to follow an agenda"? See also my comment here).
Thursday, March 29, 2012
by Werner Krauss
No comment needed; this post on freshly baked Dr. h.c. Roger Pielke's jr. blog says it all: