"Damning study" not so damning?
It is always amusing to find new assertions by Warmists and proceed to rebut them. There is an angry post here on a Warmist site that runs true to form. It purports to find fault with skeptical reports of findings by Prof. Bjorn Stevens of the Max Planck Institute -- findings that I also have drawn attention to. I headed yesterday's posts with a brief mention of them. It features a carefully-worded letter from Stevens himself denying that his findings have adverse implications for the global warming scare.
So his letter drew attention to overlooked statistics or presented new analyses? Not on your Nelly! It was just an expression of opinion. It amounted to saying "Ignore the data in my paper. Listen instead to the opinions I am compelled to express". He would not have lasted long at Max Planck unless he had asserted that he was still on the Warmist side.
And the angry post reporting his letter was quite unashamed to lie. Warmists themselves usually admit these days that global warming has stopped. They use the word "paused" rather than "stopped" but that too is just an expression of opinion. It embodies their opinion that warming will resume. But did our angry Warmist admit any of that? No. For him, "the planet continues to warm". Even though it doesn't.
It took me a while to figure out what the idiosyncratic expression "Soo-prahz" meant but I eventually figured out that he was trying to express "surprise" forcefully.
But by far the most amusing part of Mr Angry's post was a nice graph showing an upward leaping line and subtitled: "Meanwhile, the planet’s thermometer continues to rise". The graph, in short, showed what Warmist would like to believe is happening.
But one rarely has to look hard at Warmist writing to smell something fishy and the first hint that all is not as it seems with the graph comes from the note that it is calibrated in millimetres. Temperature shown in millimetres? Are degrees Celsius old hat? No. The graph is not of temperature at all but rather a very finely calibrated graph of (it appears) sea-level rise. Sea levels have of course been slowly rising for centuries -- long before the period that Warmists excoriate.
And the rate of rise shown on the graph is tendentious -- about 3 times greater than the most usual estimate. Measuring mean sea level is extraordinarily difficult. That pesky water keeps moving about! So there is a range of estimates. Mr Angry would appear to have chosen the most extreme estimate
There are few people more crooked than Warmists -- JR