SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics of Energy

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Wharf Rat who wrote (41555)7/27/2013 12:29:14 AM
From: Bilow  Read Replies (1) of 86356
 
Hi Rat; You're ignoring the cycles. Let me repeat it for you: "More consistently high recruitment occurred from the late 1930s through about 1959, after which recruitment was low through 1981 and then increased and was generally better through 2005."


Remember that 1981 happens to be the year that the alarmists use as the start of global warming. As the next cycle starts you'll get global cooling and oysters will be okay again.

The Pacific has been doing this for thousands of years.

If the climate people understood the cycle, they'd have taken it into account back in 2000 and wouldn't have been *wrong* about the global air temperature average. Instead, they assumed that the changes were all CO2 no cycle.

As the cycle turns, their estimates get more realistic. Watch for them to start getting *much* more realistic in a few years.

The basic climate alarmism error is ignoring the fact that climate has been changing constantly for millions of years. The geologists know this which is why the alarmists have trouble publishing in geology journals and why the alarmists keep geologists from publishing in the journals they control.

But as climatology becomes older, it is inevitable that it converges toward geology. Can't hide from the data.

-- Carl
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext