A correction

In the interest of accuracy I note that the picture shown below was taken the first week of April last year when we were in the throes of a full fledged Man Made Global Warming attack. Having beat back the attack, the picture to the far left was yesterday. The snow shot was about a week ago. I believe it is safe to say that Mr. Squirrel was happier while being ravaged by GW. I know I was.

In the meantime, people keeping asking hard questions. Here is one from Dr. Roy Spencer.

2) And regarding those observational estimates of (somewhat) positive cloud feedbacks: How do you know that the cloud changes that have been observed during temperature changes really are “feedbacks”? In other words, how do you know that the temperature changes caused the cloud changes, rather than the other way around?...

The fact that we don’t have a good enough understanding (or observations) of cloud changes, or precipitation efficiency changes, on decadal time scales to document such potential mechanisms seems like pretty weak justification for blaming all of our recent warming on mankind. And if you say, “well, the IPCC doesn’t claim that ALL of the warming is manmade…”, then tell me: About what percentage of the warming IS natural, and how did you come up with that quantitative estimate?...

I fear that the sloppy science that too many climate researchers have lapsed into could, in the end, hurt our scientific discipline beyond repair. The very high level of certainty (90%) claimed by the IPCC for their manmade explanation for warming can not be justified based upon the scientific evidence, and is little more than an expression of their faith that they understand the causes of climate variability – which they clearly don’t.

It's not the scientists that I worry about. The bad ones will eventually get washed out merely because facts and natural laws do not change. What I worry about is that the scare merchants are creating a nation of know-nothings.

I think it is counterintuitive for us to believe we can pollute and create emissions and not expect nature to be messed up. Its like saying dumping toxic chemicals in the water won't cause mutations of frogs in river deltas, or that top soil erosion is not happening.

The fact that carbon dixiode was taught as a natural cycle and is not a pollutant was taught in the 9th grade when I went to school. Evidently it is not being taught that now. Such failures in education has led to several generations who can not think for themselves, and thus believe any thing they are told.

And that's scary.