[ExI] Phil Jones acknowledging that climate science isn'tsettled

[Stefano Vaj]

On 1 March 2010 19:49, Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:
> ### I have reassured myself by extensive reading that deliberate
> forgery of climate data is well supported through analysis of the
> papers, as well as perusal of additional documents produced by FOIA
> requests.

This, OTOH, does not tell us anything about the factual existence of
global warming (data may be forged to support a perfectly true
hypothesis...).

In turn, however, this does not tell us anything on whether it is
anthropic, but above all what kind of difference the envisaged
reductions in carbon emissions would actually make (let us say, for
instance, that a runaway process is already in place...), let alone
how the related costs would compare with the costs of the warming
avoided, and/or with the costs of possible alternative measures of
geo-engineering (or adaptative bio-engineering!). And I see very
little discussion of those points.

All in all, this makes me inclined to think that climatology,
especially in the vulgarisations where somebody regularly suggests
that we are facing a likely extinction risk, is basically becoming a
religious discourse.

--
Stefano Vaj