Drowning in Potomac River Ice August 28, 2063.

Martin Luther King Jr. March on Washington, 100 year anniversary.

"Thousands of celebrants drowned along the sides of the Reflecting Pool when in a freak weather event, unpredicted waves of ice cubes and chunks suddenly burst over the sea wall and flooded the Martin Luther King Jr. 100th year celebrations. Park Service Officials have no explanation for it, but feel strongly it has something to do with a small militant group of anti-Climate Change demonstrators who may have left their refrigerator ice makers on high and the doors open. - UPI."

 
I fall into the category of what is in 2013 labeled as Climate change deniers.
People who still reserve the right to use their own brain, and not accept a consensus of popular fiction as Scientific fact or wisdom.

Thus, I am not a subscriber to the
Global Warming - Climate Change - hypothetical Consensus of Scientific Opinion.

Which can only mean I am a
Flat Earth revisionist?


Some days you stumble on something which strains all possibilities of logic to a point hardly identifiable as having come from a reasoning person or group of people.

Yesterday was such a day when I read the Washington Post Editorial
 "Humans’ complicity in climate change can’t be ignored."

Before I get out of your way  and let you read it yourself, I need to tell you I was a U.S. Air Force weatherman from 1964 to 1969. I served on the President's weather team which as you might suppose was directly responsible to Air Force 1 for its weather information. During that time and later I learned a lot about weather, and what we could predict, and what we couldn't.

For instance, on Monday of this week, the local weather forecast for Washington yesterday was sunny with temperatures in the 90's, for the Martin Luther King Jr. celebration. As it turned out, the actual weather had a hard time breaking out of the 70's, due to the rain. As a weather man and a science teacher, I am constantly surprised at how short people's collective memory is. Not one person complained to any weather forecaster about the inaccurate forecast as they slogged about on the wet and soggy Mall.

I mention my experience and our inability to accurately predict the weather two days in advance of it because I am now going to quote a line or two from the editorial. Man, "has almost certainly been the chief driver of the warming of the planet over the past half-century, a finding to which they ascribe 95 percent confidence. That’s the level of likelihood researchers typically consider robust enough to justify drawing very strong conclusions."

Suppose for a moment you were buying an airplane ticket to the west coast from New York, and the ticket clerk said to you, "the engineers who designed the plane you will be flying in are 95% certain you will make it off the ground. That's a level of likelihood pilots consider robust enough to justify taking off."

As a scientist I was amused by the absurdity of this tidbit of scientific fact. Carbon monoxide, " has shot up by 40 percent since 1750, with concentrations of the gas now increasing at a faster rate than at any time in the last 22,000 years."

I couldn't help myself and I said out loud, "human deaths from natural causes have shot up by 500% since 1750, with their numbers now increasing at a faster rate than at any time in the last 22,000 years."

The editor-writer didn't fail to keep me entertained with this next bit of "science."
"The IPCC admits that it doesn’t have a sure answer to a vexing question: Why has warming slowed a bit in the past decade or so?"

As things happen in Washington now a days, it was this un-predicted 15 year drop in World wide temperatures which changed the Post's name for its favorite World disease, from Global Warming to Global Climate Change. Modern Science seems to demand that whenever your observations fail to support the hypothesis, change its name! It is the Consensus which is important.

Anyone recall that in Columbus' day the Scientific Consensus was that the Earth was indeed flat!?

Finally the Post implores the U.S. and World Governments to get to action on this "uncertain incredibly complex climate system." I guess because they are afraid that the Potomac will again start freezing up the way it did back in the 1950's and 60's. Then what will we be doing?

And they tell me I am an ignorant flat earth believer?


Read it for yourself, I have attached it below in its full text.
The Post’s View
Humans’ complicity in climate change can’t be ignored
By the Editorial Board, Published: August 26

NEXT MONTH, the international arbiter of the scientific consensus on global warming will release its latest evaluation of the state of the research. A few will dismiss the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) findings as overwrought alarmism. But a draft leaked to reporters last week indicates that, for most people, the report will serve as another stern warning about the risks of continuing to pump carbon dioxide into the air.

The scientists are set to claim that the increasing amount of greenhouse gases that humans have emitted into the atmosphere has almost certainly been the chief driver of the warming of the planet over the past half-century, a finding to which they ascribe 95 percent confidence. That’s the level of likelihood researchers typically consider robust enough to justify drawing very strong conclusions.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the IPCC notes, has shot up by 40 percent since 1750, with concentrations of the gas now increasing at a faster rate than at any time in the last 22,000 years. The past three decades were probably the hottest in 800 years. Within this century, the draft report reckons, the average world temperature will increase between 2 and 7 degrees Fahrenheit.

The draft is appropriately careful when discussing global warming’s effects. The sea is rising faster in recent years than before. Climate change probably has caused more extreme weather events, such as heat waves. But, as Reuters points out, the report doesn’t insist on a connection between warming and intense tropical cyclones, for example.

The IPCC admits that it doesn’t have a sure answer to a vexing question: Why has warming slowed a bit in the past decade or so? With medium confidence, the draft suggests that the explanation lies in a mix of natural variations and things such as the oceans absorbing more heat or more volcano debris reflecting sunlight back into space. It’s also possible, the scientists admit, that the planet’s sensitivity to greenhouse emissions is lower than middle-of-the-road projections.

Unless the IPCC’s report changes drastically between now and next month, the bottom-line message will be clear. Some uncertainties are inevitable when humans try to comprehend an incredibly complex climate system. Scientists might not be able to answer some questions for years, until they can look back at what changed after so much carbon dioxide entered the atmosphere so quickly.

Those inevitable uncertainties are all the more reason for governments, starting with the United States’, to head off the ample risks of continuing to release huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the air and to set about it with speed and ambition.