Plants Kept the Ice Age in Check

Reader Comments
Add Comment

Model Fidelity

If you look at long term climatic data, there is a vast amount of variance, making it difficult to define what 'normal' truly is. This article highlights the main problem of the global warming debate which is model accuracy. In this case, one variable that was extremely wrong (I wouldn't be surprised if it was by several orders of magnitude) has been revised such that the predictions now seem to match this particular event. I would like to see an attempt made to define the accuracy of all the inputs to the model and then predict the statistical confidence of the model results. I am willing to bet that the model error is so great that the results are meaningless.
Here's my perspective.....Minimizing waste and pollution is a good thing, especially regarding our health. Making policy based on crap models is another. What really blows my mind is that no one trusts weather predictions that are more than a couple days out, however everyone seems to believe the global warming predictions that look hundreds if not thousands of years into the future.

Neil of NY @ Jul 14, 2009 12:32:21 PM

Gaia and the loss of land we took to feed and house ourselves

"We now have evidence from the Earth's history that a similar event happened fifty-five million years ago when a geological accident released into the air more than a terraton of gaseous carbon compounds. As a consequence the temperature in the arctic and temperate regions rose eight degree Celsius and in tropical regions about five degrees, and it took over one hundred thousand years before normality was restored. We have already put more than half this quantity of carbon gas into the air and now the Earth is weakened by the loss of land we took to feed and house ourselves. In addition, the sun is now warmer, and as a consequence the Earth is now returning to the hot state it was in before, millions of years ago, and as it warms, most living things will die." (The Revenge of Gaia)

Brad Arnold of MN @ Jul 14, 2009 04:41:20 AM

Let me get this straight!

You mean to tell me that now the ocean is not the largest absorber of CO2 on the planet? That goes counter to the scientific community and what they have taught about cold ocean water and warm ocean water.

Jeff of WI @ Jul 09, 2009 10:16:50 AM

Well, on the bright side...

At least those of us who adore the adorable little cottontail bunnies, who tend to eat a lot of plants (yikes), won't feel guilty for adoring the bunnies that eat so many plants.
Apparently, the science tells us that it won't make much difference.
So, I guess all bunny-lovers can go back to adoring watching the little adorable twitch-noses nibble up the garden.
They're so cut. Amidst all the news of climate change, swine flu, bird flu, and banks collapsing, there's just something nice about having these perpetually cute little critters around to twitch their little noses at you.

Angie Koutrotsios of IL @ Jul 07, 2009 17:10:09 PM

Back to article

Add Your Thoughts Title Comment 3000 characters left

About You Name Email State

Plants Kept the Ice Age in Check

Model Fidelity

Gaia and the loss of land we took to feed and house ourselves

Let me get this straight!

Well, on the bright side...

National Science Foundation

Wolves, Moose and Soil Nutrients: The Unexpected Connection

Predicting Who Will Survive Skin Cancer

Record Highs Far Outpace Lows Across U.S.

Science Discoveries

Science Discoveries

Subscribe

U.S. News Digital Weekly

U.S. News & World Report

Science