It’s Official; Global Cooling Is Real
Because the Farmer’s Almanac says so:
DUBLIN, N.H. — The Old Farmer’s Almanac is going further out on a limb than usual this year, not only forecasting a cooler winter, but looking ahead decades to suggest we are in for global cooling, not warming.
Based on the same time-honored, complex calculations it uses to predict weather, the Almanac hits the newsstands on Tuesday saying a study of solar activity and corresponding records on ocean temperatures and climate point to a cooler, not warmer, climate, for perhaps the next half century.
“We at the Almanac are among those who believe that sunspot cycles and their effects on oceans correlate with climate changes,” writes meteorologist and climatologist Joseph D’Aleo. “Studying these and other factor suggests that cold, not warm, climate may be our future.”
The Farmer’s Almanac you say? They’re a bunch of crackpots?
Maybe that’s right. But why is it we don’t trust the Farmer’s Almanac? I’d say it’s because people compare their predictions with what actually happens. Sometimes they’re right on but sometimes they’re way off.
So why then do we not subject the computer models predicting global warming to the same tests. Compare their predictions with reality. What we’ll find is that these same models have been absolutely worthless predicting actual conditions.
The Farmer’s Almanac doesn’t get billions and billions of dollars to help them with their predictions. The global warming alarmists pretty much get a blank check courtesy of you and me to help them with their studies.
We’ve been in a cooling trend since 1998 and in fact 2007 was much cooler than the models predicted. The models have an enormous gap in their logic in that they make no prediction about cloud formation which is absolutely vital in order to understand the dynamics of any warming or cooling.
When it comes down to it, the Farmer’s Almanac is actually based on sounder science than the computer models. The Farmer’s Almanac makes predictions at least partly based on solar activity. Their predictions now are based on the sunspot activity which is virtually nil. We know that the last such event led to the Little Ice Age which was a difficult time for man and beast alike.
Of course the Farmer’s Almanac is just a little publishing company whereas the global warming movement has such intellectual stalwarts such as Al Gore and Barbara Boxer in their corner.
So why is it that we don’t evaluate the science of global warming by making them prove their case? Would we sacrifice because of a prediction by the Farmer’s Almanac? Of course not. We shouldn’t be talking sacrifice now.
Buzz
italianadmirer
2Hotel9
DINO
