Evangelical warmist Katharine Hayhoe; 15-year global warming bust gives IPCC more confidence in future projections

Weather.com reports:

That level of certainty “has increased with every report,” notes Dr. Hayhoe, an expert reviewer for the IPCC. “Because we have more data, we have more science, we have more observations.”

Read more…

5 thoughts on “Evangelical warmist Katharine Hayhoe; 15-year global warming bust gives IPCC more confidence in future projections”

  1. This is truly remarkable. The old modeling were all hind casts with parameters fudged to make the theory fit the data. If the science is any good, it has to be useful for accurate forecasts. The warming rate was predicted to be 0.2C per decade back at the turn of the millenium and that rate is projected to increase as CO2 went up but since then, the CO2 has increased while the temperature has changed little. Having more data doesn’t make a good science, making good predictions and having those born out by the data give confidence in the science. The most recent data when matched to predictions is currently at the 2% confidence level. Unfortunately, the folks in Stockhom are involved in a political talking points exercise to push the CAGW memo in spite of the data. Instead of creating confidence in climate science, its clear they are simply pushing a confidence game, AKA a con job.

  2. “And increasing the debt ceiling won’t increase the debt” Barack Hussein Obama Swpt 2013. Trickle down ignorance!

  3. I dunno quite what brand of evangelical Ms (Dr?) Hayhoe is. There’s an evangelical wing that’s pretty close to liberation theology and that may be her belief.
    I’ve never been a fan of Biblical fundamentalism in any case. I’m working my way through the whole book again. In the books of Samuel and Kings, we get some might rough stuff being done in God’s name. And yes, I have some issues with some of the New Testament as well.

  4. Her entire statement is outrageous.
    But her claim that things didn’t warm as expected because of volcanos and sunspots shows the entire fallacy in AGW religion. They do not, in any way, take into account variables like the sun, the earth, the seas, etc. And then when the predictions are wrong–they blame these natural variations as if the sun, the earth and the seas suddenly broke the rules.
    But they can now tell you exactly what will happen—by ignoring all of these variables all over again.

  5. “we have more science”

    I think that one statement alone is a perfect example of just how poorly this person grasps the most basic concepts.

Comments are closed.