Climatology versus pseudoscience: Exposing the failed predictions of global warming skeptics – ‘I was surprised at how accurate mainstream climate scientists’ predictions have been, even using the earliest global climate models’

(Before It's News)

Desdemona Despair

By Greg Laden
11 March 2015

(Science Blogs) – Dana Nuccitelli is a key communicator in the climate change conversation. He is co-writer with John Abraham at the Climate Consensus – the 97% blog at the Guardian, and has contributed hundreds of entries to John Cook’s famous site SkepticalScience.com. He has measurably helped people to understand climate change science and the nuances of the false debate based over climate manufactured by science deniers.

And, he’s written a book!

Climatology Versus Pseudoscience: Exposing the Failed Predictions of Global Warming Skeptics fills a wide open niche in the climate science discussion. Dana powers through the literature on climate science, identifying and describing instances of the predictions, projections, or assertions made by climate science and compares these with assertions made by climate science contrarians, also known as deniers. (Though the distinction between denier and non-denier emerged later in the full time frame addressed in the book.) Simply put, Dana compares the two at several points to see which is correct: the projection that human generated greenhouse gas pollution warms the Earth and changes the climate, or the projection that it does not.

It turns out it does! But you knew that. But what you might not have realized is the overall time frame of how this situation has developed. Dana skillfully documents the deeply disturbing fact that the issue of global warming (and related things) has been settled for a very long time. Were it not for mainly fossil fuel industry funded anti-science activists, we would not be having this discussion today, and Dana would not have had to write his book. Rather, science would be focused on figuring out the remaining and important details of how the Earth’s climate system responds to human pollution as well as natural changes, and policy makers would be busy working out how to keep the Carbon in the ground. We probably would have had a price on Carbon years ago, and we’d probably be running our civilizations off of a very high and ever increasing percentage of clean (non fossil carbon) energy. But no, those denialists had to ruin it for everyone with their fake skepticism.

I asked Dana Nuccitelli, “What surprised you most while researching and writing this book?” and he told me,

I was surprised at how accurate mainstream climate scientists’ predictions about global warming have been, even using the earliest global climate models as early as 43 years ago. The earliest model predictions were based mainly on the warming expected from the increasing greenhouse effect, so it goes to show what a dominant factor carbon pollution has played on global temperature changes over the past half century. [more]

Climatology Versus Pseudoscience: Exposing the Failed Predictions of Global Warming Skeptics

• When government failure wastes your time
• The Cultivator – Spring 2015
• Is Hydroponics Organic?
• Salt Lake City Mayor: Climate Change Is Changing ‘The Way We Provide All Of Our Water’
• Avoiding genetic rescue not justified on genetic grounds
• The ‘Crime’ of Dr. Wei-Hock Soon
• Hawaii: 50th State Wants To Be First To Go 100 Percent Renewable
• Climate Change, Latest: It’s Real Because of the Children
• Harvard study: global warming may end threat of mummies
• Decision time at Oxford University