Sic et NonThings may well get a whole lot worse, with much less than before;but, on the other hand, they might improve a bit, with more.The planet’s coolth or warmth could sway, but awfully, we fear;and Armageddon might be nigh, or maybe not so near.Whatever happens to the seas—they’ll surely rise or fall—we climate scientists declare, “Our models forecast all!”
At Steven Goddard’s Real Science, Jimbo supplies an entertaining but instructive list of contradictory, peer-reviewed papers: one paper opines, “Amazon dry season greener”, but another claims, “Amazon dry season browner”; one paper asserts, “Avalanches may increase” , but another avers, “Avalanches may decrease”; one paper suggests, “Bird migrations longer ”, but another explains, “Bird migrations shorter” ; one paper contends, “Boreal forest fires may increase”, but another conjectures, “ Boreal forest fires may continue decreasing”; one paper maintains, “Chinese locusts swarm when warmer ”, but another insists, “ Chinese locusts swarm when cooler”; one paper surmises, “Columbia spotted frogs decline”, but another ventures, “ Columbia spotted frogs thrive in warming world”; one paper reasons, “Coral island atolls to sink”, but another reckons, “ Coral island atolls to rise”; one paper postulates, “Earth’s rotation to slow down”, but another posits, “ Earth’s rotation to speed up”; and so on.
Thanks also to Climate Lessons:
The sloppy science that led to the IPCC and to the construction and amplification of the CO2-scare is in such a poor state that those folks who study impacts are having a hard time of it. Such people form the majority of the IPCC participants, only a few dozen of [whom] are at all engaged with what drives climate change. [...]It might be easier to tell your class that not only has climate science been degraded and poisoned by the IPCC activists, but much of the rest of the IPCC, the stuff on consequences, is in a bit of a mess too.