Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
 I don't know what one "article" you read, that you are dismissing out of hand with blanket unsubstantiated claims of "inaccurate data and loads of speculation".
The page I linked has multiple long articles with well-referenced and accurate research as the basis, on cause and effects of global warming.
I'll guess you didn't click on the page at all, let alone read any of the several articles. Just dismissed it out of hand blindly.
|
It is NatGeo, a magazine, online or not it is an article.
"are expected", "could happen", "are likely", "may become" this many disclaimers in just one segment says it all. Inaccurate data referencing the weather data that has been collected throughout time and what a short period it is in the complete scale.
"He kicked off 100 years of climate research that has given us a sophisticated understanding of global warming."
Wow, really a whole 100 years!?
"According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, eleven of the twelve hottest years since thermometer readings became available occurred between 1995 and 2006."
So with 'accuracy' dating all the way back to 1724 they were able to say that this data is useful in the scope of hundreds of thousands of years.
I read your article, you cannot dismiss the scientific method because the data you want suits the result you need.