This is a post I made a few years ago. It seems it needs to be addressed again with all the AGW decisions that have been made by some pretty dubious scientists and some very political non-scientists.
I have a few questions for the AGW alarmists that are really puzzling.
The IPCC has based all their science on a computer model comparing average global temperatures since the turn of the last century (100 years +). I am sure the temperatures they have collected in the last 40 or 50 years have been pretty accurate as scientific instruments distributed worldwide are probably pretty well calibrated and collected automatically. But the data is based on what the average temperature was in the 1890's.
So let's look at the world at the turn of the century.
The western US was just being settled.
Where was the data collected and by what method?
How many collection sites were there and how many more are there today?
Were there collection sites in the Antarctic and Arctic areas, the jungles, the deserts, the remote areas of the world as there are today?
What type of thermometer was used? Was it accurate to the tenth of a degree?
How often was it collected? Daily? Weekly? Who collected it?
Where was it recorded and where is that data? What was the agency that oversaw the collection?
Are some of these temperatures based on tree rings? Are those accurate to the tenth of a degree?
The IPCC settled on a temperature from that time and who knows how accurate or scientific it is. They say the temperature today is 0.5 degrees higher than it was back then. And that is runaway warming over 100 years. They can't explain why the warming has stalled for almost two decades.
What if they had picked a starting point just 1 degree higher than they did with very dubious starting data? What if?
Then we would be in a 100 year cooling period, and this whole premise would be moot.