First Church of the Warming Globe Announces Revelation: It’s not the Heat, It’s the Humidity

Seth Borenstein of the Associated Press wrote an article on a study claiming that humans are causing global rises in humidity. The Fark headline for this was “Nonexistent global warming is causing a mythical rise in theoretical humidity levels in imaginary parts of the world“. Beautiful.

To show that this is man-made, Gillett [one of the authors] ran computer models to simulate past climate conditions and studied what would happen to humidity if there were no man-made greenhouse gases. It didn’t match reality.

These guys start with the conclusion that humans are causing catastrophic change, set up the variables to support it and these simulations. It’s an interesting trick because on the surface it’s nothing the unsuspecting person with a health respect for science would question. Yet, the idea of “man-made greenhouse gases” seems to smuggle in the whole idea of global warming in the first place.

The article goes on to claim that that humans are negatively affecting 10 separate aspects of the environment.

Climate scientists have now seen the man-made fingerprint of global warming on 10 different aspects of Earth’s environment: surface temperatures, humidity, water vapor over the oceans, barometric pressure, total precipitation, wildfires, change in species of plants in animals, water run-off, temperatures in the upper atmosphere, and heat content in the world’s oceans.

Regretfully, they have omitted one other factor, proven by a much more solid theory. In his Open Letter to the Kansas School Board, Bobby Henderson clearly shows how global warming is most certainly caused by the dramatic drop in pirate populations. Even if your faith isn’t strong, how can you argue with such a precise chart?

Both comments and pings are currently closed.

3 Responses to “First Church of the Warming Globe Announces Revelation: It’s not the Heat, It’s the Humidity”

  1. Orgetorix says:

    Hey Leon, I got your book Core PHp and came here to download the listings. Thanks for providing them to us. But then I caught this blog entry and so now I have to ask, does this mean you don’t believe in global warming, or are skeptical? It would surprise me it that were the case. Sure, it goes without saying that no one has ever built a 100% perfect mathematical model of the earth’s environment let alone its atmosphere, but its complexity doesn’t negate the fact that these myriad forces that act upon one another are not unlike a computer program wherein if you change one little bit of input o one peice of the code, you can alter the entire output and operation of the program. Clearly human beings are inputting all sorts of factors and forces both large and small to the environmental equation and that we are altering it’s output. Because we cannot measure this impact with exactitude does not negate the certainty that we are altering it.

  2. Leon says:

    Indeed, I am what is called a global warming heretic. I am not convinced that global warming is caused by humans. I don’t deny that the Earth gets warmer and cooler over time. I just haven’t seen any compelling evidence that humans have anything to do with it. Furthermore, a idea that I do find compelling is that global warming is something very like a religion that at its core aims to destroy humanity.

    I’m not prepared to submit a complete thesis on this. You should refer to my previous post about the BBC program The Great Global Warming Swindle. http://www.leonatkinson.com/index.php/the-great-global-warming-swindle/

    I hope this doesn’t ruin your enjoyment of my book.

    Thanks,
    Leon

  3. Orgetorix says:

    Leon, I came back to your site to suggest that you write a Php book that explains Php OOP in the Visual Quickpro manner, as I am enjoying what I’ve gotten out of the Php/MySql book that I’m using along with a few others. So far I’ve not found too many that delve into Php’s OOP in a manner suited for beginning/intermediate users. I’m also using Atkinson/Suraski’s Core PHP Programming, which is very in-depth not to mention reliable, since it’s basically by the developers of the language, but they write and organize the information like developers who already understand certain things inside out and not from the point of view of someone trying to learn. I’ve read the section on Objects and Classes so many times the pages are getting smeared and ragged. And I’m getting it quite well finally, but I gotta dig and do other research, flip ahead to other sections in the book, etc.. The visual quick pro format is designed as a progressive learning experience, and if you did one on OOP, even a smaller volume, you’d have a winner. I have other VQP volumes on other subjects and like the way they work, but your writing and presentation is still better than some of the others.

    That said, I then recalled that I had left a response in your blog, so I checked. To my surprise you’d responded!

    Hey, you’re entitled to your opinion, and I’m capable of separating apples from oranges, so what you say about the Global Warming debate isn’t enough for me to boycott your programming books where obviously you know what you’re talking about and have a clear and logical head. I know when to listen to those who know more about something than I do.

    I know I’ll never change your mind, so I’ll keep the global warming debate brief:

    I’m not sure what other science background you have, but whenever I meet someone who says they’ve never seen any compelling evidence for something like global warming, it’s because they haven’t REALLY looked at the evidence or given it a chance, and/or even they did, don’t have the conceptual tools or points of reference required for processing it, not unlike me trying to understand OOP written by and for programmers whose vocabulary and conceptual framework is on a level

    My major in college was Engineering/Physics. Though I aced and sailed through Chemistry and Biology faster than the Physics and mechanics , I eventually went into Electromechanical Machine Design. This was 25 years ago, long before most people heard of global warming, but I had, and began to look into the science behind it and understand it most clearly because of what I was learnig in Chemistry, Biology, and even statistics, feedback systems as well as the programming courses I was required to take. But forget that sort of thing and the abstruse anaologies to programming I tried to give you: when you come to understand that something as small as a termite is largely responsible for the quantity of methane in the atmosphere–not to mention all the other things it does that are vital to life on earth, including yours—it isn’t hard to understand how people and the quantity of emissions and by-products from the chemical reactions we humans create simply MUST be having some sort of effect on the larger system. It’s more unscientific and a matter of faith, bias, or some kind of knee-jerk reaction more akin to religion to deny that we have an effect than it is a “religious” fervor of some kind to think that we do.

    Unless you’re just trolling me, saying that the belief in global warming is more akin to a religion that’s out to destroy humanity far more of a reactionary statement with religious, apocalyptic, and conspiratorial tones than the simple, logical statement, supported by tons of science, that the earth is getting rapidly warmer and that it’s extremely probable that we have something to do with it, and that therefore maybe we can and should do something about it. How anyone can say that reducing the toxic load we human beings put into our own environment is so many ways (not just the extra CO2)—that is, stop urninating in our own well—is going to destroy humanity?

    Sorry, but in trying to proces that, I’m experiencing a fatal error….!

    Keep up the great books, though!

Subscribe to RSS Feed Follow me on Twitter!