Global Cooling Period A Time Of “Less Rapid Warming”

Saturday, May 16th, 2009

So those super-sophisticated buoys all over the ocean are spitting back data, but scientists who are emotionally attached to their flimsy global warming theory are in denial of the facts:

So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys’ findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters’ hypotheses, must be wrong.

In fact, “there has been a very slight cooling,” according to a U.S. National Public Radio (NPR) interview with Josh Willis at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a scientist who keeps close watch on the Argo findings.

Willis insisted the temperature drop was “not anything really significant.” And I trust he’s right. But can anyone imagine NASA or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) or the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — the UN’s climate experts — shrugging off even a “very slight” warming.

A slight drop in the oceans’ temperature over a period of five or six years probably is insignificant, just as a warming over such a short period would be. Yet if there had been a rise of any kind, even of the same slightness, rest assured this would be broadcast far and wide as yet another log on the global warming fire.

Just look how tenaciously some scientists are prepared to cling to the climate change dogma. “It may be that we are in a period of less rapid warming,” Willis told NPR.

Yeah, you know, like when you put your car into reverse you are causing it to enter a period of less rapid forward motion. Or when I gain a few pounds I am in a period of less rapid weight loss.


I’m sorry, but my forebrain is finding their lamebrain and clearly irrational attachment to a theory that’s being contradicted by solid data very humorous. Let’s not get confused by the facts, scientific people, it might interfere with big, fat research grants from a now-friendly and true-believing, less skeptical, and scientifically-unattached administration.

Oh, it’d be truly gut-busting if I didn’t pay taxes that will go to supporting stupid scientific advances that solve problems that don’t exist.